Molvi Shafique is named in a Bowbazar FIR over the alleged assault of journalist Mahboob Raza as the public demands lawful arrest, impartial investigation and journalist protection.
Qalam Times News Network
Kolkata | September 11, 2026
Molvi Shafique Faces Allegations in Bowbazar FIR as Public Calls for Lawful Arrest, Impartial Probe and Protection of Journalist Mahboob Raza
Molvi Shafique: A First Information Report registered at Bowbazar Police Station in Kolkata has named Md. Safique Alam, alias “Maulana”, Salman Safique and others in connection with the alleged assault of journalist Mahboob Raza while he was carrying out live news coverage. Following registration of the FIR, members of the public and the journalistic community have demanded that the accused be arrested in accordance with law, subject to the applicable legal requirements, and that the entire matter be investigated impartially and without influence.
The Molvi Shafique case relates to an alleged incident on the night of September 10, 2026, when, according to the complaint recorded in the FIR, Mahboob Raza was engaged in live news coverage near Khan Tea Stall, 31 Harin Bari Lane, Kolkata–700073, within the jurisdiction of Bowbazar Police Station. The complaint alleges that the accused persons, acting with common intention, wrongfully restrained and physically assaulted the journalist and allegedly threatened and abused him.
The FIR has been registered as Bowbazar Police Station FIR No. 0187 of 2026, bearing FIR Registration No. 32712008260187. According to the document, the FIR was registered on September 11, 2026, at 11:10 hours, while the alleged incident took place on September 10, 2026, between approximately 10:00 pm and 10:20 pm. The police document further records that information regarding the incident was received at the police station at approximately 12:40 am on September 11, with General Diary Entry No. 941.
According to the FIR, the alleged incident occurred at 31, Harin Bari Lane, in front of Khan Tea Stall, in Kolkata. The complaint states that Mahboob Raza was completing his live news coverage when the accused allegedly restrained him and physically assaulted him by punching and kicking him. The complaint further alleges that the journalist was threatened and abused and was questioned about why he had published the name of the accused persons’ father.
The FIR records allegations of injuries involving the journalist’s teeth, lips, elbow, chest and head, and specifically mentions bleeding injuries to his face and elbow. These allegations are presently part of the police investigation and have not been established as facts by a court.
The accused section of the FIR lists Md. Safique Alam, alias Maulana, as the first named accused, Salman Safique, identified as the son of Md. Safique Alam, as the second named accused, and “Others” as another category of accused. The inclusion of “Others” indicates that the investigation may identify additional persons allegedly connected with the incident.
The case has been registered under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
Section 115(2) relates to voluntarily causing hurt. Under the BNS, the offence can attract imprisonment of up to one year, or a fine of up to ₹10,000, or both. Section 117(2) concerns voluntarily causing grievous hurt and provides for imprisonment of up to seven years and fine. Section 126(2) deals with wrongful restraint and carries punishment of up to one month of simple imprisonment, or a fine of up to ₹5,000, or both.
Section 351(2) concerns criminal intimidation and provides for imprisonment of up to two years, or fine, or both. Section 352 deals with intentional insult intended or known to be likely to provoke a breach of public peace or another offence and carries imprisonment of up to two years, or fine, or both.
Section 3(5) is a provision concerning common intention. It does not itself prescribe a separate standalone punishment but can make each person involved in an alleged criminal act liable for that act where it was committed by several persons in furtherance of their common intention.
The punishments mentioned above are the statutory punishments attached to the relevant provisions. They do not mean that any punishment has been imposed on the accused. Any criminal liability and sentence can arise only through due legal process and a finding of guilt by a competent court.
The FIR states that the allegations disclosed offences under the provisions mentioned and that the case was therefore registered for investigation. Sub-Inspector Ganesh Kundu has been designated as the investigating officer. The document also records that the complaint was read over to the informant, who accepted it as correctly recorded, and that a copy of the FIR was provided to the complainant free of cost.
The FIR bears the signature of the complainant as well as the signature of the officer in charge of Bowbazar Police Station, identified in the document as Rajesh Sarkar.
The registration of the FIR has intensified demands from members of the public and sections of the journalistic community for immediate and lawful action. Those raising the demand say that if the investigation finds sufficient grounds and the statutory requirements for arrest are satisfied, the persons named in the FIR should be taken into custody and dealt with strictly according to law.
The demand for arrest has also been accompanied by calls for a comprehensive investigation into the entire incident. This includes examination of available CCTV footage, live-reporting recordings, mobile-phone videos, eyewitness accounts, medical documents and any other relevant evidence that may establish what happened at the scene and determine the individual role of each person allegedly involved.
The public demand is not simply for action against those named in the FIR but also for the identification of any additional persons who may have participated in the alleged incident. Investigators will ultimately have to determine whether the allegations contained in the complaint are supported by independent evidence.
The Bengal Working Journalists Association has already condemned the alleged assault on Mahboob Raza and called for a transparent and impartial investigation. The association has maintained that disagreement with journalistic reporting cannot by itself justify physical violence or intimidation and has urged the authorities to take appropriate legal action against anyone found responsible.
The alleged incident has also renewed concerns about the safety of journalists working on the ground, particularly when covering politically or socially sensitive matters. Journalists may face criticism, disagreement or demands for clarification over their reports, but such disputes can be addressed through lawful channels. If the allegations in this case are established, an assault on a journalist while carrying out professional duties would raise serious concerns regarding press freedom and the safety of media workers.
At the same time, the accused persons remain entitled to due process and the presumption of innocence. The FIR represents the allegations made to the police and is not itself a judicial finding of guilt.
The immediate demand from the public, therefore, is for a swift, impartial and evidence-based investigation, followed by lawful action against every person whom the investigation establishes to have participated in the alleged assault. The authorities are also being urged to ensure that journalists can perform their professional responsibilities without fear, intimidation or physical pressure.
The case will now be closely watched as the police investigation proceeds and evidence is gathered concerning the alleged assault of Mahboob Raza.
