Mahua Moitra on Thursday lashed out at the Noida Police, accusing them of helping an accused person evade arrest in a case involving allegedly fabricated chats purportedly exchanged between her and political strategist Prashant Kishor. The Trinamool Congress MP alleged that BJP IT cell head Amit Malviya, played an instrumental role in helping the accused abscond.
In a series of posts on X, Moitra alleged that despite a notice under Section 41A being served, the local police enabled the suspect to abscond when a team from West Bengal travelled to Noida to execute a warrant. “Hello @timesofindia your article is incorrect. @noidapolice lying. Accused was home when police arrived & then escaped with help of Noida cops after making few political calls (to Malpua). Here is video of him when cops arrived,” she said in her first post, claiming that the Noida police lied.
She went onto alleged that the accused had contacted Amit Malviya, head of the BJP’s IT cell, who she claimed intervened. “WB police went to execute a warrant. See how accused calls BJP troll army chief @amitmalviya who threatens Noida Police with ‘Aap Kuch Nahi Karenge’. Everything is caught on video so @noidapolice should stop lying,” she wrote.
“Listen to Amit Malviya calling back with Noida cop on line… Then @noidapolice took away WB police to station & helped accused abscond. Stop lying,” she wrote, sharing a video clip that purportedly shows the accused speaking on the phone while police personnel were present.
The controversy stems from screenshots recently circulated on social media, which were claimed to show private conversations between Moitra and Kishor. The Krishnanagar MP has described the chats as fabricated and filed a formal complaint in Nadia district, alleging the deliberate spread of false content in her name.
Based on her complaint, an FIR was registered and an investigation launched. During the probe, police identified Surajit Dasgupta as the individual who allegedly shared the content on social media. Forensic analysis later confirmed, according to the West Bengal Police, that the chats were forged.
After Dasgupta failed to respond to a notice asking him to appear before the investigating officer, a four-member team from West Bengal travelled to Noida with a non-bailable warrant issued by a court in Nadia district.
The West Bengal Police alleged that they had located and detained the accused when a large contingent of Noida Police personnel arrived and prevented them from completing the arrest. The Bengal officers were allegedly taken to a local police station for nearly 90 minutes, during which time the suspect escaped.
In a statement posted on X, West Bengal Police said, “Our team, with full cooperation of UP Police, executed the warrant and detained the accused on Feb 10. Thereafter, following external communications by certain political functionaries, the team was taken to the local police station and lawful proceedings were interrupted, enabling the accused to abscond.”
The Noida Police, however, have denied any wrongdoing and said they extended full assistance to their counterparts from West Bengal. Responding to the allegations, Noida Police said the Bengal team had arrived without prior intimation. The Station House Officer of Phase-2 Police Station told NDTV that the local force had sought time to comply with standard procedure and assemble a raiding team in accordance with protocol.
According to the Noida Police, apartment security at the Lotus Panache housing complex was informed before the raid, as required. When the joint team entered the premises, the accused was not found. Officers said his wife was informed about the warrant and nearby areas were searched, but he could not be traced.
The dispute has quickly escalated into a political flashpoint between the Trinamool Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party. Amit Malviya rejected the allegations and accused the West Bengal Police of overreach. “Why is the state police machinery being weaponised against those who merely amplify what is already circulating in the public domain? Why target individuals who are, in effect, only sharing what others are discussing?” he said.
