West Bengal

IIE DIGITAL: The West Bengal government on Thursday informed the Calcutta High Court that the much-debated anti-goonda legislations have not yet come into force, putting to rest questions over the absence of an official notification. The clarification came during the hearing of two petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the proposed laws. The petitions, filed by the Association for the Protection of Democratic Rights (APDR) and the All India Lawyers’ Union (AILU), argued that although the Assembly had passed the Bills, they had never been formally notified, a mandatory step before any legislation can become operational after receiving the Governor’s assent. Appearing for the state, Additional Advocate General Billwadal Bhattacharya informed a division bench led by Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty that while the Governor had approved the Bills, they had since been sent to the President for assent, which is still awaited. Since the President has not yet granted approval, the Bills have not acquired the status of law, Bhattacharya submitted, urging the court not to entertain the petitions at this stage.

Accepting the argument, the bench declined to hear the challenge to the West Bengal Public Safety and Control of Anti-Social Activities Bill, 2026, popularly referred to as the proposed "Goonda Act". The court observed that without the President's assent, the legislation could not be treated as an Act and therefore could not be subjected to judicial scrutiny or interim relief.

However, the court decided to proceed with the challenge to the West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order (Amendment) Bill, 2026, since it seeks to amend the existing West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1972. Senior advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, appearing for the AILU, argued that several provisions of the amendment were unconstitutional. The matter has been listed for hearing on September 16, with the state directed to submit its affidavit by September 10.

The issue gained prominence after questions were raised over the absence of any official notification bringing the anti-goonda laws into force, despite public announcements by Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari that the legislation would be implemented from July 13. He had also stated in the Assembly that those involved in the July 24 students' protest would face action under the new laws. BThe government's submission before the High Court, however, confirmed the petitioners' contention that the Bills remain unenforced. Counsel for the APDR, advocate Sabyasachi Chatterjee, has argued that the proposed Goonda Act contains provisions that violate Article 22 of the Constitution, particularly a clause permitting preventive detention for up to 12 months. According to him, only Parliament has the authority to enact laws allowing detention beyond three months, making the proposed state legislation constitutionally questionable. Following the hearing, Chatterjee criticised the government, stating that the proposed Goonda Act is "still not an Act" and accusing the state of misleading the public regarding its legal status.