Calcutta HC Directs Police to Apprehend Two Accused and Seize Devices Holding Obscene Images of Petitioner
The Calcutta High Court has ordered Mogra Police Station to apprehend two accused persons and seize their electronic devices containing obscene photographs, so stored data cannot be further disseminated.
Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya, sitting singly at the Calcutta High Court, on 14 July 2026 directed the concerned police authorities to continue their efforts to apprehend respondent nos. 6 and 7 in connection with Mogra Police Station Case No. 346 of 2026 and to seize electronic devices held by them. The petitioner, whose identity has been anonymised, had approached the court contending that despite a criminal prosecution being registered under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act, the accused persons remained at large and their devices — which allegedly contained obscene photographs of the petitioner — had not been seized. The court noted that so long as those devices remained with the accused, the risk of further dissemination of the stored data persisted.
The Dispute Before the High Court
The petitioner filed W.P.A. 15042 of 2026 seeking intervention after Mogra Police Station, West Bengal, registered Case No. 346 of 2026 against respondent nos. 6 and 7. The FIR invoked Sections 64(1), 66, 69, 74, 75(2), 79, 115(2), 117(2), 124, 127(2), 109(1), 308(2), 351(2), 351(3), 316(2), 318(3), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 66E and 72 of the Information Technology Act.
Mr. Ranadev Sengupta, appearing for the petitioner along with Mr. Akash Ganguly and Mr. Amaan Deep Gupta, submitted that the criminal prosecution had been initiated but further steps were required: specifically, the seizure of electronic devices in the possession of the accused persons that were said to contain obscene photographs of the petitioner. The submission was framed in terms of protecting the petitioner's dignity and privacy.
Mr. Suryaneel Das, learned Additional Government Pleader, appeared for the State along with Mr. Souvik Nandy and Mr. Dyutimoy Paul.
What the Police Communication Disclosed
Before the hearing, the State side filed a communication dated 6 July 2026 from the Inspector-in-Charge, Mogra Police Station. The court took this on record and directed a copy to be given to the petitioner's advocate.
The communication disclosed two material facts. First, one pen drive or storage device had already been seized from the petitioner, who is also the complainant in the FIR, and it was believed that certain materials were stored on it. Steps were being taken to examine and analyse that electronic evidence in accordance with the provisions governing collection and preservation of digital evidence.
Second, and more directly relevant to the petitioner's grievance, the communication acknowledged that steps were being taken to apprehend respondent nos. 6 and 7 — but as of the date of the communication, the two accused had not yet been apprehended.
The Court's Reasoning
Justice Bhattacharyya considered the submissions and the contents of the 6 July 2026 communication together. The court's concern centred on the delay in apprehending the two accused persons. As long as respondent nos. 6 and 7 remained at large with their electronic devices, there was a real risk that data stored on those devices could be shared with others.
The court observed that the accused persons were required to be apprehended specifically so that seizure of their devices could be effected and the further spread of the stored data could be prevented. The formulation of the direction — to seize devices “so obnoxious data stored therein shall not be further disseminated” — reflected the court's view that the harm was ongoing and time-sensitive.
Directions Issued
The court directed the concerned police authorities to continue their endeavour to apprehend respondent nos. 6 and 7 and to make seizure of the devices in their possession so that the obnoxious data stored therein would not be further disseminated.
The Inspector-in-Charge, Mogra Police Station, was directed to file a further report disclosing the steps taken pursuant to the order passed on 14 July 2026. That report is to be placed before the court at the next hearing.
Outcome
The matter was adjourned and listed for further consideration on 11 August 2026 under the same heading. The case will next be taken up to assess whether respondent nos. 6 and 7 have been apprehended and their devices seized, as directed.