Calcutta HC Protects Anandabazar Patrika Journalists From Coercive Action Over ‘Gerua Gundami’ Headline

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has restrained the West Bengal Police from taking coercive steps against two journalists, one of them the editor of Anandabazar Patrika, in connection with an FIR alleging that a newspaper headline hurt religious sentiments, holding that the petitioners were entitled to protection under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 having already complied with notices issued under that provision.

Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya was hearing a writ petition filed by Ishani Datta Ray and another journalist against the State of West Bengal and others, questioning the propriety of Bowbazar Police Station Case No. 180 of 2026 dated 28.08.2026, registered on a complaint dated 27.08.2026. The complaint alleged that the headline "Gerua Gundami" ("Saffron Hooliganism") used in a news item published in the 21.08.2026 edition of Anandabazar Patrika hurt Hindu religious sentiments on account of the use of the word "Gerua" ("Saffron").

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that notices under Section 35(3) BNSS had already been issued to them and duly complied with, and that the offences invoked in the prosecution carried punishment of less than seven years' imprisonment, entitling the petitioners to protection from arrest under that provision. Mr. S.N. Mookherjee, learned Senior Advocate, further placed Section 196 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 before the Court to submit that, on the contents of the complaint, that provision, which deals with promoting enmity between groups, may not be attracted.

The Court held that, taking note of the provisions of Section 35(3) BNSS and the petitioners' compliance with the notices issued thereunder, they were entitled to the protection envisaged by that section. It, however, declined at this stage to examine whether Section 196 BNS was attracted on the facts of the complaint, leaving that question to the investigating agency to address in accordance with law while completing the investigation.

The Court directed: “concerned police authorities are directed not to take coercive steps against petitioners till 15th December, 2026 or until further order, whichever is earlier.”

The petitioners were directed to cooperate with the investigation and comply with any future notices, with liberty granted to the State respondents to apply for variation or vacation of the order should the petitioners fail to cooperate. 

Noting that the complainant had not yet been made a party to the petition, the Court granted leave to the petitioners to amend the cause title to implead the complainant as an additional respondent by 25.09.2026, with notice to be served within seven days. 

The Court recorded the State's submission that custodial interrogation of the petitioners was not required, and listed the matter for further consideration on 01.12.2026.

Appearances:

For the Petitioners: Mr. S.N. Mookherjee and Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Senior Advocates, with Mr. Arunabha Deb, Mr. Deepan Kr. Sarkar, Ms. Ashika Daga, Mr. Matri Prasad Das and Ms. Sampurna Mukherjee, Advocates.

For the State Respondents: Mr. Rajdeep Mazumder, Learned Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee and Mr. Sayan Mukherjee, Advocates.

Case Title: Ishani Datta Ray & Anr. vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors., WPA 24272 of 2026