Calcutta HC dismisses plea on West Bengal mosque loudspeaker order
Synopsis
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a PIL challenging West Bengal Police's alleged verbal order to remove loudspeakers from mosques — ruling it cannot act on an undocumented directive. Meanwhile, the state government says 5,299 public address units have already been removed, with mosques accounting for over 4,200 of them, all under a 2020 court verdict on noise regulation.
Key Takeaways
A Calcutta High Court division bench on 18 August dismissed a PIL against an alleged verbal police directive to remove loudspeakers from mosques in West Bengal .
The bench — Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Atarup Banerjee — ruled no order can be passed on a verbal, undocumented directive.
The petition was filed on the basis of media reports; the 4,000 mosques allegedly affected were not parties to the case.
Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari said 5,299 loudspeakers have been removed statewide — 4,203 from mosques and 1,096 from temples.
The government says the drive implements a 2020 Calcutta High Court verdict on noise regulation, not a new policy.
A division bench of the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday, 18 August dismissed a petition challenging an alleged verbal directive by the West Bengal Police to remove loudspeakers and microphones from mosques across the state. The bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Atarup Banerjee, ruled that no court order could be passed on the basis of a verbal police directive.
Why the Court Dismissed the Petition
The bench found the petition procedurally deficient on multiple grounds. It noted that the plea was filed solely on the basis of media reports rather than any formal, documented order from the police. Crucially, the approximately 4,000 mosques allegedly covered by the purported directive were not made parties to the case, meaning the court had not heard their version of events. On both counts, the bench held the petition lacked merit and declined to intervene.
Background: The Loudspeaker Removal Drive
The petition was a public interest litigation filed by an individual represented by Kalyan Banerjee, a senior advocate and four-time Trinamool Congress (TMC) legislator. It alleged that police were forcibly removing public address equipment from religious places — particularly mosques — without issuing any legal notice to the affected institutions.
The controversy gained traction amid broader political tensions in West Bengal over the selective application of noise-regulation rules at places of worship.
What the Government Said
West Bengal Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari recently rejected allegations of selective targeting, presenting state-level figures to counter the claims. According to Adhikari, a total of 5,299 loudspeakers had been removed from religious places across the state in a special police operation — of which 4,203 were from mosques and 1,096 from temples.
Adhikari maintained that the drive was carried out in compliance with a 2020 Calcutta High Court verdict on noise regulation, issued during the tenure of a previous state government. 'There is no problem if noise is restricted within permissible limits within the premises of a religious place. The state government has not introduced any new rule and was implementing the Calcutta High Court verdict given during the previous government's tenure in accordance with the law,' Adhikari said.
Legal and Political Context
The 2020 High Court ruling on noise pollution has served as the legal anchor for the current operation. Critics, however, argue that the absence of written notices and the higher proportion of removals from mosques raises questions about uniform enforcement. The government's position — that it is merely implementing an existing court order — is likely to be tested further if affected mosque authorities choose to approach the courts independently.
With the petition dismissed and the mosque authorities yet to formally contest the drive, the legal chapter on West Bengal's loudspeaker removal operation remains open.
Point of View
Not on the underlying policy — which means the legal question of selective enforcement remains entirely unresolved. The government's own numbers are revealing: mosques account for nearly 80% of the removals, a ratio that critics will not let rest. Adhikari's defence rests on a 2020 court order, but the absence of written notices to affected institutions is a procedural vulnerability that a better-drafted petition — filed by the mosque authorities themselves — could exploit. This is not a closure; it is a postponement.
NationPress
18 Aug 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Calcutta High Court dismiss the loudspeaker petition?
The court dismissed the petition because it was based solely on media reports of a verbal police directive rather than any documented order, and because the mosques allegedly affected were not made parties to the case. The bench held it could not pass any order on an undocumented verbal directive.
How many loudspeakers have been removed in West Bengal?
According to Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari, a total of 5,299 loudspeakers have been removed from religious places across West Bengal in a special police operation — 4,203 from mosques and 1,096 from temples.
What is the legal basis for West Bengal's loudspeaker removal drive?
The state government says the drive implements a 2020 Calcutta High Court verdict on noise regulation. Adhikari stated that no new rule was introduced and the operation follows the court's earlier directive issued during a previous government's tenure.
Who filed the petition and who represented the petitioner?
The public interest litigation was filed by an individual and represented in court by Kalyan Banerjee, a senior advocate and four-time Trinamool Congress legislator.
Can the affected mosques challenge the loudspeaker removal separately?
Yes. The High Court's dismissal was on procedural grounds — the mosques were not parties to this case. Mosque authorities retain the right to independently approach the courts to contest the removal drive.
