West Bengal Post Poll Violence- Calcutta High Court Reserves Judgment

Calcutta High Court on Tuesday reserved orders on a batch of petitions pertaining to the alleged post-poll violence in the State of West Bengal. A 5 Judge Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justices I.P Mukerji, Harish Tandon, Soumen Sen and Subrata Talukdar heard concluding arguments from the concerned parties on Tuesday. The West Bengal government made extensive submissions following which the submissions were responded to by the counsels of the petitioners. The Union also submitted before the Court that it was willing to extend the services of central investigating agencies such as the CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) and the NIA (National Investigation Agency) pursuant to the Court's orders. Submissions on behalf of the State of West Bengal: NHRC committee members were politically motivatedSenior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing on behalf of the Director-General of Police, (DGP) West Bengal submitted before the Court that the constitution of the NHRC committee was inherently biased and politically motivated. The senior counsel made a reference to the committee member Atif Rasheed who had previously contested elections on behalf of the BJP. It was also pointed out to the Court that Atif Rasheed had uploaded an interview with a Superintendent of Police on his Twitter handle on July 9 which indicates that a determination regarding the allegations of post-poll violence had already been made even before the submission of the NHRC committee report. "The committee report has been filed on July 13 and the approach of the members of the committee was already evident on July 9", senior counsel Singhvi alleged. The senior counsel further submitted that Rajulben L. Desai, another committee member also has a distinct affiliation with the BJP. In addition, Rajiv Jain another committee member was the former Director of the Intelligence Bureau. As a result, the senior counsel submitted there exists a 'reasonable likelihood of bias'. He also made a reference to the Supreme Court decision in A.K Kripak v. Union of India wherein the Apex Court had clearly laid down that even if a likelihood of bias is indicated against anyone committee member, the entire proceeding must be vitiated. "One single drop taints the whole glass. This kind of a composition seriously taints the entire process as well as the report", counsel Singhvi alleged. NHRC report contains premeditated complaints Senior Advocate Manu Singhvi further contended that the report submitted by the committee is riddled with cases that had been filed before the declaration of the elections results. The senior counsel then proceeded to apprise the Court of various examples of such premeditated complaints. "The whole approach is causal and premeditated. Almost as if readymade complaints were kept ready", the counsel alleged. Thus it was contended that such a report cannot be relied upon due to the patent infirmities pointed out. Opining further on the ambit of post-poll violence cases, the senior counsel submitted that only those incidents that had taken place in the 'immediate aftermath of the election result' must be taken into consideration. Thus complaints must have a nexus to the election result and there must be 'temporal and spatial limits' imposed while taking note of complaints, the senior counsel argued. Discrepancies between the English translated version of statements and the originally recorded statements of victims Senior counsel Singhvi also pointed out to the Court that there exists huge discrepancies in the original Bengali statements filed by the victims and their subsequent translation made by the committee. Pointing out one such alleged 'gross exaggeration', the counsel submitted that the committee in the English translated version of a statement had inserted the phrase 'TMC goon' which did not find any mention in the original statement recorded. Advocate General Kishore Datta further apprised the Court of an instance wherein the original complaint pertained to an incident regarding the snatching of a gold chain, completely unrelated to post poll violence. However, in its subsequent translated version, the committee had recorded that the concerned complainant had alleged assault by TMC workers wherein his turban had been forcefully removed. He also submitted that in a lot of cases registered by the committee, the accused had been labelled as a victim. Further, it was submitted that the NHRC committee in its press note had mentioned that it had visited various affected areas. Objecting to such a press note, the senior counsel contended, "the press note has never been released. Also, what are the criteria for choosing to visit only those specific locations?"The NHRC committee report cannot be relied upon Senior counsel Singhvi submitted that in light of all the infirmities pointed out, the report cannot be relied upon let alone be trusted in any manner. "Your Lordships are being suggested...

West Bengal Post Poll Violence- Calcutta High Court Reserves Judgment

Aaratrika Bhaumik

Tags