Is he Messi’s childhood friend? HC asks Aroop lawyer

Kolkata: Calling the Messi fiasco at the Salt Lake stadium a “blot” on the city’s image, the Calcutta High Court on Wednesday slammed former state sports minister Aroop Biswas’s “close proximity” to football great Lionel Messi. Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya did order no coercive action against Biswas till Ag17, in a case filed by event organiser Satadru Dutta. The judge, however, flagged the six months delay in filing of FIR (May 30) for an event which took place on December 13, 2025.Dutta after the order said he will move before the Supreme Court to challenge it. He wrote on Facebook, “Going to the Supreme Court. I have faith in judiciary.”Referring to the media photographs of Messi being held by the waist by former sports and youth minister, Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya asked his counsel Kishore Datta, “Look at the photograph, is this person not your client? Does it not breach the security of the soccer legend? How can he do this? Is he Messi’s childhood friend? Spreading his hands around Messi’s waist. How did he do this? We, the residents of Kolkata, felt ashamed because of this Messi incident fiasco.”Justice Bhattacharyya directed Bidhannagar’s Commissioner of Police (CP) to conduct an independent probe into the incident, where intruders had managed their way to the ground, and Messi had to leave before the scheduled date due to security breach. The report has been called for within four weeks. The case will be next heard on August 4.“Messi is a soccer legend who was slated to appear at Vivekananda Yuba Bharati Krirangan on December 13, 2025 in front of a large number of spectators. However, Messi had to leave the field much prior to scheduled time due to a security breach…Thousands of Messi fans purchased tickets to witness the presence of their hero at the field, but the early exit of Messi from the field shattered their dreams. It was a complete fiasco in organising such an event. However, in three other metro cities--Hyderabad, Mumbai and in Delhi, similar programmes were organised seamlessly. Failure to organise the programme left a blot on the image of this city. While granting interim protection to the petitioner this court cannot shut its eyes to such Messi event fiasco,” Justice Bhattacharyya held.But the “interim protection” for Biswas comes with riders. He will have to submit his passport with jurisdictional court within seven days. He cannot leave the city without taking the court’s permission. But more importantly, he will have to appear for the summons given at least 48 hours notice and cooperate with the investigating agency for a “meaningful” probe. The Director General and Inspector General of Police (DG&IGP) West Bengal was also directed to submit other criminal proceedings which may be pending against Biswas.Biswas approached Justice Bhattacharyya’s bench seeking quashing of the FIR registered against him at Bidhannagar. He did not appear in the summons issued against him twice, one of the times, he had replied, “However prevailing weather conditions and excessive heat, I have developed severe stomach ailment accompanied with dehydration, my blood sugar level has increased as a result I am physically incapacitated from attending the police station and participating in the investigation proceedings.” But no supporting documents were submitted.The state, represented by Advocate General Surojit Nath Mitra opposed the prayer, stating that since Biswas had missed two summons and when the second summon was being issued they found his home locked, he should not be given any protection under section 35(3) of the BNSS.Satadru’s allegations against Biswas were confined to taking complimentary passes, close proximity tickets and accreditation cards for the event. It was alleged that he had made wrongful monetary gain. Police had filed a case under sections of BNS which are cognisable and non-bailable, but all with punishments under seven years, if convicted.But Justice Bhattacharyya prima facie held that custodial investigation in the case was not needed considering the nature of the allegation. “What are the reasons that he needs to be arrested for the investigation? You have taken point on being influential. Another point troubling the mind of the court is that the incident took place on December 13, 2025, when was the complaint lodged?...And you are afraid that the petitioner will intimidate? A complaint was lodged after six months.”END