Archive · 20 Aug 2026
Calcutta High Court Rejects Mondal’s FIR Quashing Plea
The Calcutta High Court refused to cancel a criminal case against Tulu Mondal.
The case concerns cash and gold worth nearly Rs 50 crore found in a relative’s home.
Police say the assets may have come from illegal sand and stone mining.
Mondal was not at the house when it was searched on July 29.
His lawyer said Mondal had already left India on May 23.
The lawyer also argued that simply having cash and gold is not a crime.
The state said the investigation should continue and that an organised-crime law may apply.
The court said the investigation was still at an early stage and ordered police to proceed according to law.
The Calcutta High Court dismissed Tulu Mondal’s petition seeking to quash an FIR linked to the seizure of nearly Rs 50 crore in cash and gold.
The assets were recovered from Mondal’s brother-in-law Minar Mondal’s residence in Birbhum district during a July 29 search.
The court noted that Tulu Mondal left India on May 23 and directed police to continue investigating.
Mondal’s lawyer challenged the search, the use of Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and police jurisdiction over unexplained cash and gold.
The court scheduled Mondal’s separate challenge to his proclaimed-offender status for August 27.
- Who
- Tulu Mondal, his lawyer Dushyant Dave, the West Bengal police, and Advocate General Surojit Nath Mitra are central to the case.
- What
- The Calcutta High Court dismissed Mondal’s plea to quash an FIR concerning the seizure of nearly Rs 50 crore in cash and gold.
- When
- The seizure occurred on July 29; Mondal left India on May 23; the court’s decision was reported on August 20; a separate hearing is scheduled for August 27.
- Where
- The assets were seized at Minar Mondal’s residence in Birbhum district, West Bengal, and the petition was heard by the Calcutta High Court.
- Why
- The court declined to halt the case because the investigation was at a nascent stage, while police alleged the assets were linked to illegal mining.
Mondal’s legal arguments
State’s case and court response
Search before FIR registration
Mondal’s legal arguments
Dushyant Dave argued that police entered and searched the house based on a general diary recording and questioned the circumstances of the alleged forced entry before the FIR was registered.
State’s case and court response
The court said the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita does not bar a search and seizure before an FIR is registered.
Meaning of the cash and gold
Mondal’s legal arguments
Mondal’s lawyer argued that possessing cash and gold is not itself an offence, and that unexplained income should be addressed by income-tax authorities.
State’s case and court response
Police alleged that the recovered assets were proceeds of illegal sand and stone mining. The Advocate General said the investigation should continue given the alleged scale of the crime.
Use of Section 111
Mondal’s legal arguments
Dave argued that Section 111 could not be invoked because the required earlier chargesheets and timing conditions had not been satisfied.
State’s case and court response
Advocate General Surojit Nath Mitra argued that Section 111 could apply because of the alleged magnitude of the crime. The state said two chargesheets had been filed against Mondal on August 4 in other cases.
- Court decision
- The Calcutta High Court dismissed Mondal’s petition to quash the FIR.
- Seized assets
- Nearly Rs 50 crore in cash and gold, including gold bars, was recovered.
- Seizure date
- July 29
- Seizure location
- The residence of Mondal’s brother-in-law Minar Mondal in Birbhum district, West Bengal.
- Relevant provision
- Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, concerning organised crime, was invoked against Mondal.
- Mondal’s departure
- The court noted that Mondal left India on May 23.
- Next hearing
- His challenge to the Suri court’s proclamation of him as an offender is scheduled for August 27.
