11 Ranajit (AR.CT) 29.09.2026 Ct.05 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.A. NO 24915 OF 2026 Dr. Susmita Pal -vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Dhananjay Banerjee, Mr. Kalidas Saha, Ms. Khushi Mollick ….for the petitioner. Md. Wasim Akram, Ms. Sabrina Parveen ….for the respondent nos.5 & 6. Mr. Rajdeep Mazumdar, Mr. Kushal Chatterjee, Mr. Suraj Mishra ….for the State. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of petitioner is taken on record. 2. By presenting this writ petition it is alleged that there were electronically dissemination of obnoxious messages by respondent no.4 resulting in complaint date 19th August, 2026 by petitioner which was forwarded vide email to Malda Cyber Crime Police Station for taking steps. It is further contended on behalf of petitioner that in spite of such complaint being lodged on 19th August, 2026 steps are not being taken by police authorities as a result whereof petitioner and her husband, both are doctors, are facing disturbance in leading normal life and performing their professional work. 3. Learned advocate representing respondent nos.5 & 6 submits that there is allegation of rape against husband of petitioner giving rise to a criminal prosecution and investigation is going on, 4. Mr. Mazumdar, learned Additional Advocate General has filed a communication dated 17th September, 2026 of Inspector-in-Charge, Cyber Crime Police Station, Malda and same is taken on record. 5. Communication dated 17th September, 2026 reveals different story. It is disclosed in communication that after forwarding email letter on 19th August, 2026 by petitioner and same was taken into consideration, it was found that allegations were substantially based on electronic communications and in support of same screenshots were forwarded; verification of relevant electronic material, its source, context and other particulars were found to be necessary for proper examination and appraisal of complaint in accordance with law. 6. It is also disclosed in communication dated 17th September, 2026 that only screenshots could not enable respondent police authorities to independently ascertain the complete context of communications or conclusively verify their source, authorship, account attribution, integrity and other relevant technical particulars. Appropriate verification of electronic materials was therefore considered necessary before arriving at conclusion. 2 7. In view of aforesaid impediments found by concerned police authorities on receipt of complaint of petitioner which was submitted vide email letter dated 19th August, 2026, repeatedly petitioner was asked to appear before the police authorities and cooperate but those requests made by police authorities did not yield result. 8. In view of difficulties expressed by police authorities in conducting preliminary enquiry on receipt of complaint dated 19th August, 2026, petitioner is directed to cooperate with police authorities which would enable police authorities to take effective steps in consideration of complaint dated 19th August, 2026. 9. Writ petition stands disposed of. 10. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.) 3