"CBI Moved SC Against This Court's Order": SG Tushar Mehta Seeks To Defer Narada Case Hearing Before The Five-Judges Bench Of Calcutta HC

He sought adjournment on the ground that CBI has approached the Supreme Court against the Division Bench order allowing house-arrest of the four TMC leaders. The agency has also challenged the order of Justice Arijit Banerjee allowing interim bail.

A 5-Judge Bench comprising of ACJ Rajesh Bindal, Justices Harish Tandon, IP Mukerji, Arijit Banerjee and Soumen Sen is hearing a reference made to it by a Division Bench of Acting CJ Rajesh Bindal and Justice Arijeet Banerjee, following a split on the grant of interim-bail.

The Bench asked the Solicitor how does its hearing of the matter today will affect the SLP filed by the CBI.

"Whatever orders are passed by us can be the subject matter of SLP in Supreme Court. So, what is the prejudice caused by bench hearing the matter today?" the Bench inquired.

It further stated that the agency could not challenge the order of Justice Banerjee allowing interim bail as it does not constitute the order of the Division Bench.

The Bench also told the SG that there is also the threat of a cyclone hitting West Bengal soon and the High Court may not be able to hear the matter in coming days. "That also needs to be taken into account," the Bench told the SG.

The Solicitor General however urged that the CBI should be given an opportunity to appeal to Supreme Court, and it will be appropriate that the hearing is deferred.

Advocates representing the arrested TMC leaders opposed the plea for adjournment tooth and nail.

"It is sad and unfortunate that an investigating agency, which calls itself premier, has sought an adjournment when the question of personal liberty is involved. This is "unbecoming of CBI" to make this request knowing what transpired in court, and knowing the urgency," Senior Advocate AM Singhvi said.

He pointed out that the request of CBI for stay of the house-arrest order was rejected by the Division Bench and recounted that mere filing of SLP is not an automatic stay warranting adjournment of the matter.

Senior Advocate Siddhartha Luthra pointed out that mentioning is allowed in Supreme Court and despite that, CBI opted not to mention its SLP. He also informed the Bench that the SLP has not been given a diary number and only a provisional number is given.

The Solicitor General clarified that he is not seeking to stay the house-arrest order, but to defer the hearing till day after tomorrow. He insisted that the arrested leaders are in the comforts of a home and no prejudice would be caused by extending the same.

Responding to Luthra's submissions, the SG stated there was mentioning last week. However, now, there is a change and mentioning can be made only before the Registrar. He also told the Bench that the SLP has been given a diary number and CBI has made a request for listing tomorrow.

The Solicitor General said that CBI is entitled to make an appeal to the Supreme Court in the wake of unprecedented events of "CM barging into the CBI office", law minister doing protest in court complex etc.

The Advocate General however objected to references being made to the Chief Minister as State of West Bengal has not been made a party in the CBI's petition and no copy has been served on the state.