The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday pulled up the counsel appearing for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for not being aware of the facts in the West Bengal post-poll violence case.
The Court vide order dated August 19, 2021 had handed over to the CBI the investigation of cases related to murder, rape and crime against women whereas a SIT had been constituted to investigate other criminal cases related to the violence that had allegedly taken place post the declaration of the West Bengal assembly elections in May 2021.
A Bench comprising Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Bibhas Ranjan De observed on Tuesday,
"It is unfortunate that the petitioner is being represented by an Advocate who is unaware as to the facts of the case. He is unable to render any assistance to the Court"
In the instant case, the CBI had filed applications for cancellation of bail of accused persons Ajoy Bar, Rajesh Sardar, Chiranjit Roy, Sujay Bar, Anup Mondal and Pintu Bar. The Alipore court had granted bail to the accused persons in October 2021 which was confirmed in January 2022. Thereafter, challenging this impugned order the CBI had filed an application for cancellation of bail before the High Court in April 2022.
However, on Tuesday when the pleas were listed for hearing, the counsel appearing for the CBI had failed to assist the Court with the facts of the case following which the Bench had expressed its displeasure at the conduct of the counsel.
Accordingly, the Bench listed the petitions for further hearing on June 6, 2022, and took on record the affidavit-in-opposition filed.
It had been argued by the CBI that while granting bail to the accused persons, the concerned lower court had failed to take into consideration the role played by the accused persons in the incident.
"A proper appreciation of the materials in the case diary would have revealed the presence of cogent and clinching material against the opposite party. The assessment of facts by the Court and the order passed thereafter leaves much to be desired, and under such circumstances, the order granting bail being perverse should be set aside at once," the application read.
Case Title: CBI v. Ajoy Bar and connected matters