Click the Play button to listen to article

Calcutta High Court judge, Justice Suvra Ghosh had yesterday recused from hearing former TMC minister Sujit Bose's bail plea, after alleging that an advocate for the petitioner had made contact with her private secretary to access the case records in her chambers.

Advocate Mousumi Bhowal, who was appearing as the Advocate-on-Record for Sujit Bose in the bail proceedings before the Calcutta High Court, has placed on record her opposition to the version of events surrounding the controversy that arose after the matter had been reserved for judgment.

She has sought an enquiry to prove her innocence and requested for the CCTV footage of the front room of the judge's chamber to be preserved.

In an affidavit filed before the High Court, Bhowal has categorically denied that she had connived with the Court Officer or made any attempt to obtain access to the case records with an oblique motive.

Bhowal stated that she was engaged as the Advocate-on-Record for Bose in CRM(R) No. 58 of 2026. According to her, after hearing the parties, Justice Suvra Ghosh had reserved the matter for pronouncement of judgment on August 17, 2026. She submits that she was called by the court officer to supply judgments relied on during arguments. 

According to the advocate, on August 18, 2026, at around 2.25 PM, she received a telephone call and WhatsApp message from Advocate Nahid Ahmed, the junior of Senior Advocate Sabyasachi Banerjee, who was also appearing for the petitioner.

Bhowal stated that Ahmed informed her that Shikha Mukherjee, the Court Officer posted in Court Room No. 15 and Personal Secretary to Justice Ghosh, had called her to the courtroom for supplying copies of judgments.

She thereafter went to Court Room No. 15 at around 2.35 PM and met the Court Officer.

Bhowal stated that the Court Officer requested her to accompany her to the Sesquicentenary Building so that she could identify the judgments which were required to be supplied.

The advocate's affidavit states that the Court Officer then took her to the Judges' corridor and the front room of Justice Ghosh's chamber between approximately 2.40 PM and 2.42 PM, where two court staff members were present.

According to Bhowal, the Court Officer asked her to sit on a chair and thereafter asked a court staff member sitting outside the chamber to show the records of the case. "I have not uttered any word," Bhowal stated.

She further stated that the court staff member informed the Court Officer that the case file was with Justice Ghosh and, therefore, could not be shown to her.

"I have immediately left the said place without saying anything," the advocate stated.

Bhowal has specifically rejected any suggestion that she had attempted to enter the chamber of Justice Ghosh or had acted in concert with the Court Officer to access the case file.

"I have never connived with the learned Court Officer to bring out the record of the case with an oblique motive," the affidavit states.

She further asserted, "I have never tried to enter the chamber of Her Ladyship the Hon'ble Justice Suvra Ghosh" during the relevant period.

Bhowal stated that after leaving the area outside the chamber, the Court Officer requested her in the corridor of the Sesquicentenary Building to hand over copies of the judgments which had been referred to by Senior Advocate Sabyasachi Banerjee during the hearing.

She stated that she subsequently supplied two judgments to the Court Officer at Court Room No. 15 at around 3.10 PM.

The judgments, according to the affidavit, were orders delivered by Justice Ghosh in CRM(SB) No. 84 of 2024 on December 16, 2024 and CRM(SB) No. 29 of 2025 on December 19, 2025.

The advocate has also stated that she subsequently learnt from Nahid Ahmed that the Court Officer had called the registered clerk of Senior Advocate Sabyasachi Banerjee on August 18 for the purpose of obtaining copies of the judgments.