Daijiworld Media Network - Kolkata (SHP)

Kolkata, Jul 9: In the year 2007, Mintu Mallick a judicial official who was forced to retire from service, got reinstanted after 12 years. The Calcutta High Court also agreed to pay Rs 1 lac for the damages caused to Mallick, with the decision taken 12 years ago.

Mintu Mallick held charge of both Judicial Magistrate and Railway Magistrate, Sealdah. On May 5, 2007. He like many other commuters was waiting for the train to reach his office, which ended being invariably late. On asking around, locals informed that the train was delayed because of suspicious activities which took place somewhere near New Alipore station for offloading contraband material and that guards and drivers assisted in facilitating the trade.

The officer then took matters into his own hand when he approached the driver in his cabin. Failing to retrieve any concrete evidence or answers, Mallick directed the railways police to ensure that the guard of the train and the driver were presented before the court.

Following the arrest, protest was carried out against Mallick and abusive slogans and messages were voiced. P K Singh, who headed the protest with railway employees was arrested and booked under IPC section 228. In retaliation to P K Singh’s arrest, more violence erupted around the Railway Magistrate’s court.

Taking into account the events that unfolded, the High Court slapped charges on Mintu Mallick. The first charge was, entering the motorman’s cabin in an unauthorized manner and using forcible means to barge into the cabin despite objections by the driver. The second charge was, the officer exceeded his jurisdiction when he decided to inquire the reasons for the delay of the train in addition to the unauthorized verbal booking of the guard and the driver which resulted in protests causing disruption in the train services.

Mallick was then forced to retire from his services. When he challenged the order of the court his plea was dismissed. Fast forward, 12 years later, the High Court admitted to procedural infirmities in its decision and the punishment was unacceptable. The court stated that Mallick did not barge into the cabin and that he had due authority to call for reports from the motorman and the guard for the delay.