The West Bengal human rights group Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM) has approached the National Human Rights Commission of India, the Supreme Court of India and senior West Bengal authorities seeking an independent investigation into the alleged illegal detention, disputed identification as a Bangladeshi national, attempted push-back across the India-Bangladesh border and custodial ill-treatment of a 66-year-old man from Uttar Dinajpur district.
In a complaint dated September 5 and signed by MASUM secretary Kirity Roy, the organisation identified the man as Jalil Akhtar, son of Late Roushon Ali and a resident of Bagrail village under Dalkhola Police Station in Uttar Dinajpur. MASUM alleged that Akhtar, an agricultural day labourer, was taken from his home around midnight on the intervening night of July 19 and 20, 2026, and was subsequently held before a formal criminal case was registered against him.
The complaint disputes the police allegation that Akhtar is a Bangladeshi national and says he has substantial documentary evidence indicating Indian identity and long-standing residence in West Bengal. According to MASUM, Akhtar possesses an Elector Photo Identity Card, Aadhaar card and ration card, while his name allegedly appears in the 2002 electoral records along with the names of his father and grandfather in earlier electoral records. The organisation also said Akhtar had voted in the 2026 West Bengal Assembly election and, according to information gathered during its fact-finding exercise, had never travelled to Bangladesh or another foreign country.
MASUM has alleged that police records contain significant discrepancies concerning Akhtar's identity, including his father's name, age, address and nationality. The complaint refers specifically to a written report attributed to Sub-Inspector Toton Debnath, which allegedly described the accused as “Jalil Akther (70)” from a village in Haripur police station area of Thakurgaon district in Bangladesh. The complaint says Akhtar is instead Jalil Akhtar, aged about 66, son of Roushon Ali and a resident of Bagrail under Dalkhola Police Station in West Bengal.
The organisation has questioned whether the discrepancies are merely clerical errors, arguing that identity particulars are central to determining whether the person arrested is the same individual described in the police allegations. It has called for independent verification of the origin and authenticity of all documents relied upon by the authorities, including any certificate or declaration allegedly obtained from a Gram Panchayat Pradhan.
According to MASUM, Akhtar was subsequently detained at a Nizampur holding facility reportedly functioning at Monirul Uloom High Madrasha under the direction of the Islampur Police District. The organisation alleged that his family repeatedly approached police authorities, including officials at Karandighi and Dalkhola, with identity documents and witnesses but failed to secure his release or obtain a satisfactory explanation for the treatment of the elderly man as a foreign national.
A central allegation in the complaint concerns an alleged attempt to take Akhtar towards an isolated portion of the India-Bangladesh international border with the intention of pushing him into Bangladesh. MASUM said it was informed during its fact-finding exercise that police or intelligence personnel and Border Security Force personnel were involved in the alleged episode. Akhtar reportedly protested that he was an Indian citizen and was ultimately returned and handed over to Islampur Police authorities for verification. The allegations have not been independently established in the complaint itself, and MASUM has called for an investigation into the incident.
The organisation said Dalkhola Police Station subsequently registered Case No. 212 of 2026 on July 21 under Section 21 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, following which Akhtar was formally arrested. MASUM has urged authorities to establish the precise circumstances and duration of any custody preceding the formal arrest, arguing that any such period must be accurately reflected in official records.
The complaint also raises questions about an alleged delay in verifying Akhtar's documents. MASUM said that during a bail hearing, the learned Magistrate at Islampur directed the police to verify the authenticity of documents produced by Akhtar, but alleged that Investigating Officer Sub-Inspector Adhir Barman took several weeks to submit the verification report.
MASUM has further raised concerns about Akhtar's health and detention conditions. According to the complaint, he is approximately 66 years old, is currently confined in Islampur Jail and is suffering from various ailments, including reported psychiatric problems. The organisation has sought an independent medical examination and appropriate treatment. It also cited the alleged health problems of Akhtar's wife and the economic difficulties faced by his sons, who it said are migrant daily-wage workers.
The complaint names several police officials whose conduct it says should be examined if an independent investigation establishes wrongdoing, including Islampur Police District Superintendent Rakesh Singh, IPS, Dalkhola Police Station Inspector-in-Charge Sajal Roy, Sub-Inspector Toton Debnath and Investigating Officer Sub-Inspector Adhir Barman. MASUM has stressed that it is not presenting allegations against individual officers as established facts and has called for responsibility to be determined only after due investigation.
The organisation has asked authorities to preserve and produce records including General Diary and station diary entries, arrest and detention records, holding-centre registers, CCTV footage, movement registers, relevant medical records and communications between the police, Intelligence Branch and BSF concerning Akhtar. It has also sought examination of whether any official record was knowingly fabricated, altered or based on misleading information.
MASUM has invoked constitutional safeguards relating to equality, liberty and protection against arbitrary arrest and detention, referring specifically to Articles 14, 19, 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. The complaint also cites the Supreme Court's judgment in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal concerning safeguards governing arrest and custody. It further refers to India's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The organisation said the case had emerged from a fact-finding exercise conducted with assistance from Biplab of Anyotaro Path O Chorcha, Kolkata, and following interactions with Akhtar's family members, relatives and co-villagers. It also acknowledged assistance from advocate Mukhtar Ahmed of Islampur Court and referred to media reports published by Puber Kalom and Anandabazar Patrika.
MASUM has asked the authorities to ensure that Akhtar receives medical care and protection while in custody, independently verify his electoral and other identity documents, and determine his nationality through a lawful and fair process. It has also urged that no attempt be made to remove or deport him from India unless and until his nationality has been determined through appropriate legal procedures.
The organisation has additionally requested an examination of whether Akhtar's case reflects a wider practice of identifying people in border areas as Bangladeshi nationals and subjecting them to detention or attempted push-back without adequate verification or judicial safeguards.
In its complaint, MASUM said the case raises a question extending beyond the individual dispute over nationality: whether a person claiming Indian citizenship and possessing long-standing Indian documentary records can be deprived of liberty and subjected to removal proceedings without an effective determination of the underlying facts.
The organisation has therefore urged the National Human Rights Commission and other competent authorities to intervene urgently, conduct an independent investigation and, if violations are established, initiate appropriate legal and departmental proceedings and consider compensation and other public-law remedies.
Comments
Post a Comment
NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor