Only 8 of 127 km on India-Bangladesh border given to BSF: Calcutta HC slams Bengal government over fencing delay

The January 27 interim order, which came on an a PIL filed by former Deputy Chief of Army Staff Subrata Saha, categorised the land required for border fencing into three. First category: lands already acquired and compensation received by state government from the central government but, only partial portion of which is handed over to BSF; second category: lands for which acquisition/purchase proceedings commenced under the direct purchase policy but could not be finalised and is stuck at different stages, including the stage where it is pending approval before the state government; and third category: land for which acquisition/purchase process is yet to start.

Regarding the first category, totalling 198.252 km of land stretches in the districts of 24 Parganas (N), Nadia, Murshidabad, Malda, Dakshin Dinajpur, Uttar Dinajpur, Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, and Cooch Behar, the High Court had noted that only 70.925 km had been handed over and directed that state government to hand over the remaining 127.327 km before March 31.

Among others, the state had then cited the engagement of its revenue officers for the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls for the delay in acquiring the required lands. The court, however, rejected the argument. It said that for this category, “the other reasons will not cut any ice…This category of land needs to be handed over to the BSF at the earliest. The SIR procedure cannot, in our considered view, be an impediment for expediting this procedure and hand over these lands in 9 districts…”.

The Centre had then prayed that the state be directed to give the land expeditiously so as to put up the fence “to curb cross border terrorism, infiltration etc.” The state also agreed that the fencing “is in national interest and necessary for the defence of the country”.

Ordering the handover of the remaining land, the court had asked the state government to file a compliance report on affidavit. Although the state filed the report on March 25, it was not on affidavit.

The bench, which perused the report, noted that it “shows that only about 8 km of land has been handed over by the state in the first category to the BSF” out of the remaining 127.327 km, after the January 27 order.

Taking stern exception to the report not being filed on affidavit, the court noted in its April 22 order, “The covering letter of this report dated 25.03.2026 is signed by the Special Secretary to the Government of West Bengal directing Mr. Anupam Mitra, Joint Director, L&LR and R, R&R (Land and Land Reforms and Refugee Relief and Rehabilitation) Department to submit/file affidavit in this regard. However, the report filed on 25.03.2026 by Joint Director is not on affidavit.”

The court said that “much more than the time desired (2/3 weeks) was granted to the state” but “no reason at all is furnished as to why the order of the court is not complied with”.

Fixing the hearing next on May 13, the court asked the state “to file a detailed affidavit informing the steps taken on day-to-day basis, district-wise in compliance of the” January 27 order.