In the wake of escalating tension in Calcutta high court over a single judge bench accusing a division bench judge of partisan behaviour in a politically sensitive case, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India, on January 29, transferred the case to itself.
The apex court had taken suo motu cognisance of the developments on January 26 and had scheduled the matter for hearing on Monday before the bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY.. Chandrachud and justices Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose.
During the hearing, CJI Chandrachud said, “Casting aspersions on single judge or division bench would not be proper. Anything we say will have (an) effect on impinging the dignity of the high court. We will handle it in some way.”
During the hearing, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of the state government, pointed out that “the (single bench) judge is taking part in the rally.” However, the CJI said that the chief justice of the high court is allocating cases and the SC would not like to “arrogate his powers.”
The matter has now been listed on February 19. The parties are to complete their pleadings within three weeks.
The apex court intervention came following Calcutta HC judge, Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay’s outburst against a division bench judge, calling the bench’s order “wholly illegal and has to be ignored” and personally targeting one of the division bench judges, Soumen Sen.
In his January 25 order regarding CBI inquiry into an alleged caste certificate scam in the state’s medical recruitment process, Gangopadhyay, while noting that what he was going to do was “unusual”, said that he would fail “in my duty to hold the sanctity of judiciary in general and this court in particular” if he did not take this step.
He then went on to allege that he was told some days back by Justice Amrita Sinha that Justice Soumen Sen called her in his chamber on the last day before vacation and “like a political leader he dictated to Justice Sinha” that Abhishek Banerjee, West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee’s nephew and the Trinamool Congress (TMC) all-India general secretary, “should not be disturbed.”
Sen allegedly also asked Sinha to stop live-streaming of proceedings in her court and dismiss the two petitions before her involving Abhishek Banerjee, Gangopadhyay wrote in his order.
TMC national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee. Photo: File
He added that Justice Sinha told him about this over the telephone during the vacation and subsequently reported it to the chief justice of the high court, which has reportedly communicated the allegations to the CJI.
“Justice Sen is acting clearly for some political party in this State and, therefore, the orders passed in the matters involving State, are required to be re-looked [into] if the Hon’ble Supreme Court thinks so,” he wrote and went on to add, “What Justice Sen has done today is to advance the cause of his personal interest to save some political party in power in this State. Therefore, his actions clearly tantamount to misconduct.”
He asked the registrar general of the high court to send copies of this order to the CJI and the Chief Justice of the Calcutta HC. The SC acted the very next day.
A political battle fought in the courts
Justice Gangopadhyay’s reference to the incident involving Justice Sinha is of political significance. Earlier this month, Abhishek Banerjee had approached the Supreme Court, seeking the removal of cases involving him from both Justices Gangopadhyay and Sinha’s benches, highlighting how the judges had made “politically motivated” remarks. Justice Sinha has repeatedly questioned the growth in Banerjee’s assets since 2014 – the year he became an MP for the first time.
Justice Amrita Sinha. Photo: Calcutta HC website
While multiple cases alleging corruption and involving TMC leaders are before Justice Sinha’s bench and she has passed several orders that went against the state’s ruling party, the state CID is investigating a case involving Justice Sinha’s husband, Pratap Chandra Dey, an advocate.
A 64-year-old woman and her daughter had alleged before the Supreme Court that Dey and Justice Sinha interfered in a criminal probe involving a property dispute. Dey, representing the petitioner’s opponents, was using his stature as the judge’s husband to obstruct and influence the police investigation, the petitioner, Bani Roy Chowdhury, alleged.
The Supreme Court had in November 2023 asked the CID to continue the investigation without caring about any external influence. Dey recently alleged that the CID was trying to harass him and pressing for information – not on the case concerned but on his wife, Justice Sinha.
On December 23, Justice Gangopadhyay raised the issue of CID summons to Dey. “Is it such an important case? CID is not doing proper investigation in many important cases. The Supreme Court has given many instructions to the CID and the state to investigate. Does the CID investigate
Read More