On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to grant a stay on the Calcutta High Court's directive for a CBI investigation into the Sandeskali violence. This incident involved alleged attacks by Trinamul leader Sheikh Shahjahan and his supporters on ED officials, along with reported instances of sexual assault against local women and occupation of their lands.

Nevertheless, the apex court nullified the remarks made by the division bench regarding the conduct of the state police machinery while ordering the CBI investigation.

During the proceedings, a bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Sandeep Gupta verbally queried senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Jaideep Gupta, who were representing the Bengal government, regarding the delay in the state's arrest of Sheikh.

Gupta clarified that the delay in Sheikh's arrest was due to a stay on the investigation, but after obtaining the necessary clarification, the state promptly arrested the accused Trinamul leader.

Additional Solicitor-General S.V. Raju, representing the Enforcement Directorate (ED), provided a brief overview of the case to the bench. He explained how officials from the central agency were attacked during a raid on Shahjahan's premises on January 5.

Raju asserted, "They attempted to diminish the severity of the case, particularly regarding the assault on the ED officer, by filing a different case. This action resulted in the stay of the investigation. Subsequently, the Advocate General consented to include Section 307 (attempt to murder)."

Raju defended the High Court's decision, stating that it was appropriate to direct a CBI probe due to various flaws in the Bengal police investigation.

Senior advocate Singhvi argued that the court should remove the criticism leveled against the state.

Initially, the bench indicated that Singhvi would need to present arguments regarding expunging the remarks. However, Justice Gavai later consented to consider the matter.