A public interest litigation (PIL) was filed before a division bench of the Calcutta High Court on Monday, 10 August, challenging the West Bengal government's directive to remove microphones and loudspeakers from all religious places across the state. The PIL has been admitted by the bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty, though a date for the first hearing is yet to be fixed.

Who Filed the PIL and What It Seeks

The petition was filed by Kalyan Banerjee, a four-time Trinamool Congress (TMC) Lok Sabha member and senior advocate, on behalf of Danish Faruqi, a lawyer. The PIL seeks the withdrawal of the state government's order and questions the legal basis on which authorities have been removing sound equipment from religious sites, particularly mosques.

Banerjee alleged that the police acted on a verbal instruction rather than any official written order or memo. 'This has become a new trend in West Bengal in the new regime. The Chief Minister says something and the police implement the order without an official order or memo being issued,' Banerjee said.

Separate Petition Seeks Rally Permission

A second petition was also filed on Monday before the single-judge bench of Justice Sougata Bhattacharya at the Calcutta High Court. Filed by Abdul Samad through advocate Sabyasachi Chattopadhyay, a Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader, the petition sought permission to hold a protest rally on Tuesday from Rajabazar in North Kolkata to Rani Rashmoni Road in central Kolkata against the loudspeaker removals. The matter was expected to be taken up later in the day.

Government's Position and Opposition Pushback

Opposition parties had earlier accused the state government of selectively targeting mosques in the crackdown. Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari, however, clarified that the directive applies to all religious places — including temples — and is not confined to mosques. Critics argue that the absence of a formal written order undermines transparency and due process.

Broader Context

The dispute over loudspeakers at religious sites is not new to India — similar controversies have played out in Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, and other states in recent years. What distinguishes the West Bengal episode, according to petitioners, is the alleged reliance on verbal directives rather than a statutory framework, raising questions about administrative accountability. The Calcutta High Court's decision on the PIL could set a precedent for how such orders are issued and challenged across the country.