The Calcutta High Court has taken a strong stand on national security and directed the West Bengal government to hand over land acquired along the Indo-Bangladesh border to the Border Security Force (BSF) by March 31, 2026. The court made it clear that activities related to elections or administrative procedures cannot be used as excuses to delay work connected to the country’s security.

The order was passed on Tuesday by a Division Bench of Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen. The judges were hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a former Deputy Chief of Army Staff. The petitioner raised serious concerns about the safety of India’s international border with Bangladesh, especially in West Bengal, where large portions of the border are still unfenced despite approvals being given many years ago.

During the hearing, the court was informed that West Bengal accounts for more than half of the total length of the India–Bangladesh border. Even after several Cabinet approvals since 2016, fencing work has not been completed in many areas. The petitioner argued that this delay has created major security risks for the country.

https://distrustuldistrustulproprietor.com/upj30178v8?key=4974c7d92916eda10d59ce1649b14da7

According to the petition, the unfenced stretches of the border have made it easier for illegal activities to take place. These include infiltration across the border, smuggling of cattle and gold, drug trafficking, and the circulation of fake currency. The petitioner also placed data from answers given in Parliament before the court to show how serious and widespread the problem is.

Representing the Union government, Additional Solicitor General Ashok Kumar Chakrabarti told the court that land acquisition is mainly the responsibility of the State government. However, once compensation has been paid and all approvals are given, the State is legally and constitutionally bound to hand over the land to the BSF.

He informed the court that out of the required 235 kilometres of land, only around 71 kilometres have been handed over so far. This is despite repeated requests and reminders from the Union Ministry of Home Affairs. He also referred to a letter sent by the Union Home Secretary in June 2025, urging the State government to speed up the process.

https://distrustuldistrustulproprietor.com/upj30178v8?key=4974c7d92916eda10d59ce1649b14da7

The Additional Solicitor General relied on Articles 256, 257 and 355 of the Indian Constitution. He explained that these Articles give the Union government the power to issue binding directions to States when the security of the nation and protection from external threats are involved. He strongly opposed the State’s argument that the delay was due to the revision of electoral rolls and upcoming Assembly elections.

According to him, election-related work cannot be more important than protecting the country’s borders. He stressed that national security must always come first and cannot be postponed under any circumstances.

During the hearing, the judges questioned why the urgency provisions under Section 40 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 were not clearly used. The court noted that high-level discussions had already taken place between the Centre and the State, which showed that the matter was serious.

The Union government argued that its communications and repeated reminders should be treated as actions taken under the urgency provision. On the other hand, the State government said that Section 40 is an exception and can be used only when there is a specific and formal decision declaring an emergency situation.

The State also defended its use of the Direct Purchase Policy. It explained that this policy was adopted to avoid long legal battles and high compensation claims from landowners. According to the State, direct purchase helps complete projects smoothly and reduces disputes.

However, the court was not convinced by this argument. The judges expressed concern over the use of the Direct Purchase Policy in matters related to national defence. They pointed out that this policy was designed mainly for stalled infrastructure projects and not for something as critical as securing an international border.

After hearing all sides, the court divided the issue into three clear categories. The first category included land that had already been acquired and paid for but was still not handed over to the BSF. The second category covered land where acquisition or purchase proceedings were still ongoing. The third category involved land where no process had yet started.

https://distrustuldistrustulproprietor.com/upj30178v8?key=4974c7d92916eda10d59ce1649b14da7

For land that had already been acquired and compensated, the court said there was absolutely no reason for any further delay. It ordered the State government to hand over possession of this land to the BSF by March 31, 2026. The judges clearly stated that election-related activities cannot be treated as obstacles in matters of national security.

The court also directed that all ongoing land acquisition or purchase processes should be completed within the same deadline. However, the question of formally invoking the urgency provisions under Section 40 was kept open. The court said this issue would be examined in more detail at a later stage.

The matter has now been listed for further hearing in April 2026. The court is expected to review the progress made by the State government and examine whether further directions are needed to ensure that border fencing work is completed without delay.

This order is being seen as a strong message from the judiciary that national security cannot be compromised due to administrative delays or political considerations. With increasing concerns over cross-border crimes and illegal activities, the court’s decision highlights the urgent need to secure India’s borders effectively and without further postponement.