The Calcutta High Court closed the legal proceedings surrounding a police search at BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari’s rented house in Kolaghat after police formally reported that no incriminating material was found during the raid. Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya disposed of the matter after police submitted a report attributing the 2024 operation to a "miscommunication" based on unverified source inputs, prompting Adhikari’s legal counsel to withdraw the petition challenging the action. Origin of the 2024 Kolaghat Police ActionThe controversy dates back to May 22, 2024, during the height of the Lok Sabha election campaign. A large contingent of police officers from the Kolaghat police station in Purba Medinipur conducted a late-night raid at a rented property frequently used by Adhikari as his political campaign office and temporary residence. Police officials subsequently registered a suo motu First Information Report (FIR), alleging they had received confidential intelligence that illegal firearms, country-made bombs, and unaccounted cash were being stored at the premises ahead of polling. Adhikari, who was attending election rallies elsewhere in the state at the time, strongly condemned the raid as political harassment. He argued that police forces breached his court-mandated interim security protection to inspect his premises without producing a valid search warrant. Case Timeline & Legal MilestonesDate / MilestoneLegal Event & Court ActionMay 22, 2024Kolaghat police conduct search at Adhikari’s rented residence and lodge a suo motu FIR.May 24, 2024Calcutta High Court stays the suo motu FIR and restrains police from taking coercive action.June 2026Single-bench extends interim protection shielding Adhikari from investigative action.September 2026Police submit a final report confirming a blank seizure list; High Court closes the petition.Police Submit "Blank Seizure List" to High CourtDuring the hearing before Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya, the Officer-in-Charge of the Kolaghat police station submitted a written status report on the 2024 search operations. The police report explicitly confirmed that:Zero Seizures: The search yielded no incriminating material, weapons, or unaccounted cash. Miscommunication: The operational raid was conducted based on misleading source inputs, attributing the incident to an administrative miscommunication during Model Code of Conduct enforcement. Blank Seizure List: The official police seizure list submitted to the court remained completely blank.Following the submission of the police report confirming that no evidence existed to support the initial suo motu complaint, advocate Moyukh Mukherjee, representing Adhikari, informed the bench that the petitioner did not wish to press the challenge further. Consequently, the High Court formally disposed of the petition. Political Fallout and Legal PrecedentsThe closure of the case marks a significant legal win for Suvendu Adhikari, who has repeatedly accused the West Bengal state administration of misusing law enforcement agencies to target opposition leaders through unverified FIRs.Adhikari’s legal team emphasized that the high court had previously granted him broad protection against coercive police action across multiple registered cases, requiring law enforcement to obtain prior judicial permission before initiating arrests or invasive searches.The police department's admission that the raid yielded no evidence resolves a two-year-old legal battle that had sparked significant political friction between the BJP and the ruling Trinamool Congress in Purba Medinipur.
