A West Bengal-based human rights organisation, Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha, has sought urgent intervention over the alleged arrest and unexplained disappearance of Abdul Barek, a resident of Gopalpur, Bailyamor Panupara, in North Dinajpur, West Bengal.
According to a complaint sent to senior police and administrative authorities in West Bengal as well as international human rights bodies, Barek was allegedly taken into custody by a police team from his residence on June 2, 2026, at around noon. The complaint states that police personnel first asked for his identity documents, which Barek and his family provided. The documents were allegedly taken without a receipt, following which Barek was taken away in a police vehicle to Bhatol Out Post.
The complaint alleges that the family was not provided with a memo of arrest and was not given a clear explanation for the arrest. It further states that the family has been unable to establish Barek's whereabouts or legal status since he was taken into custody.
Concern reportedly increased on September 30, when the complainant contacted the Inspector-in-Charge of Raiganj Police Station by telephone. According to the complaint, the officer advised that information should be sought by email. An email was subsequently sent to the police station seeking details of Barek's arrest and whereabouts, but no response had been received at the time of the complaint.
The complainant further claims that an available list of persons arrested by Raiganj Police District on June 2 did not contain Barek's name. This has raised questions about whether an official record exists documenting his arrest and subsequent custody.
The complaint says Barek possesses several Indian identity documents, including an Aadhaar card, driving licence, PAN card and an Indian passport issued by the competent Regional Passport Authority following police verification through the Enforcement Branch. It also states that he participated in the 2026 Legislative Assembly election and exercised his franchise.
The complainant has stressed that the existence of these documents does not prevent authorities from conducting a lawful investigation into nationality or citizenship if legally warranted. However, it argues that any such issue must be addressed through due process rather than through secret or unrecorded detention.
The complaint also highlights the family's dependence on Barek. It states that he is the principal source of livelihood for a family of approximately 23 people and earns a living through pisciculture while also owning landed property. His disappearance has consequently caused what the complainant describes as severe financial distress and uncertainty for his family.
The organisation has raised questions about whether Barek was formally arrested, the case or legal provision under which he was allegedly detained, the identity of the officer who ordered or carried out the arrest, the taking of his identity documents, his movements after being removed from his residence and whether he was produced before a Magistrate.
The complaint also expresses apprehension that Barek may have been removed from India and possibly deported to Bangladesh. It makes clear that this is presently an allegation requiring verification rather than an established fact. It calls for authorities to determine whether any transfer across the international border occurred and, if so, under what legal authority and procedure.
The complainant has invoked constitutional safeguards under Articles 14, 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India and referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, which established safeguards relating to arrest and custodial detention. The complaint argues that the alleged absence of an arrest memo, uncertainty surrounding Barek's custody and the reported absence of his name from arrest records warrant immediate scrutiny.
The organisation has asked the authorities to obtain and examine the FIR, General Diary entries, arrest register, station diary, custody register, arrest memo, records concerning the seizure of Barek's identity documents, CCTV footage and other material relating to the events of June 2.
It has also sought confirmation of whether Barek was produced before a Magistrate and, if so, the relevant remand records. The authorities have been asked to disclose his present location and legal status to his family and ensure that he receives all constitutional and statutory safeguards if he is found to be in custody.
If authorities contend that Barek is a foreign national, the complaint asks that the evidentiary and legal basis for such a claim be disclosed and that the question of his nationality or citizenship be determined strictly according to law. If he has been transferred across the international border or deported to Bangladesh, the organisation has sought an independent inquiry into the legality of the action and the identification of officials responsible.
The complaint has called for consideration of a judicial or independent investigation, particularly because of the alleged absence of an arrest record and the failure to provide information about Barek's whereabouts. It has also sought appropriate legal and disciplinary action against officials found responsible for any violation of his constitutional or legal rights.
The complaint was signed by Kirity Roy, Secretary of Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM) and National Convenor of Programme Against Custodial Torture & Impunity (PACTI). It was addressed to senior officials including the Director General and Inspector General of West Bengal Police, the District Magistrate of North Dinajpur, the Superintendent of Police of Raiganj, the Home Secretary of West Bengal and relevant United Nations human rights bodies.
Comments