Calcutta High Court Declines to Transfer Messi Event Investigation to CBI, Orders Affidavits from State and Organisers

The Calcutta High Court has refused to transfer the ongoing investigation into the chaotic Messi event to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), stating that the inquiry is still in its preliminary stages and there is no evidence suggesting that the probe has been “vitiated or polluted.” The decision was delivered by a Division Bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul, along with Justice Partha Sarathi Sen, on Monday.

The case stems from an event on December 13, which faced significant disruptions when spectators, frustrated by obstructed views and early closure, clashed on the grounds. Several attendees were reportedly jostling around Messi, blocking the view of those in the stands, prompting public interest litigations (PILs) seeking the transfer of the investigation to the CBI and the refund of ticket prices.

Rejecting the plea for interim relief, the Bench observed that an investigation cannot be shifted to a central agency merely on request or due to allegations. The judges clarified that only in rare and exceptional circumstances, where there is clear evidence of misconduct or bias in the investigation, can such a direction be issued.

The court directed both the West Bengal government and the event organiser to file their affidavits in response to the petitioners’ claims within four weeks, while allowing the petitioners two weeks to file a counter-affidavit. The PILs will be taken up again during the week commencing February 16.

The state government’s counsel emphasised that the event was organised by a private company, and tickets were not sold by the state. The investigation, conducted by the Special Investigation Team (SIT), is ongoing in good faith. It was also noted that the state’s Director General of Police (DGP) had been issued a show-cause notice regarding the incident.

Satadru Dutta, the owner of the event management company, was arrested shortly after the programme. His lawyer stated that the organisers were unaware of how the crowd managed to surround Messi and block the spectators’ view, noting that similar events in Hyderabad, Mumbai, and Delhi had proceeded smoothly.

Petitioners, including Leader of Opposition Suvendu Adhikari, raised questions about the source of funds for the event and sought a probe by a central agency. Another petitioner highlighted that the state’s enquiry committee was administrative rather than judicial in nature. The state responded by producing a gazette notification confirming the formation of the committee, which includes a retired High Court judge and senior administrative officers.

The Bench concluded that, at this stage, there was no reason to interfere with the SIT’s investigation and that further proceedings should continue based on evidence.