Supreme Court Declines Abhishek Banerjee's Plea For Action Against HC Judge Over Interviews, But Agrees To Consider Request For Transfer Of Cases

The Supreme Court on Friday (February 9) expressed disinclination to entertain Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee's request for 'necessary action' against Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, judge of the Calcutta High Court, for 'politically motivated' interviews. At the same time, it agreed to consider the other relief prayed for by the Trinamool Congress national general secretary in his writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, for a transfer of the cases concerning him from the present high court bench to a special bench. With respect to this prayer, the bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices Manoj Mishra and Satish Chandra Sharma stated that Banerjee's petition will be tagged with the suo motu case initiated by the Supreme Court in which a batch of pleas concerning the medical admissions scam were transferred from the Calcutta High Court to the top court.In his petition filed through Advocate-on-Record Srisatya Mohanty, Banerjee requested action against the judge and urged for measures to prevent prejudicial remarks that could impact ongoing investigations into the alleged primary teachers' recruitment scam. The petition comes amid a backdrop of escalating tensions between the judiciary and political figures in the state.The reliefs he sought include: First, a direction to ensure that remarks made by the judge inside or outside the court premises against the petitioner would not influence the ongoing investigation by the central agencies; second, 'necessary action' against Justice Gangopadhyay for engaging in 'politically motivated' interviews related to pending legal matters. Such actions were deemed to contravene principles of judicial propriety and restraint, significantly prejudicing the rights and interests of the Petitioner; third, a direction to transfer the writ petition pending before the high court and related issues to a special bench that was uninfluenced by any remarks made by the said judge or his successor; fourth, directions to high courts to prevent its judges from making adverse comments regarding any sub judice case or the involved parties, and fifth, directives to postpone the reporting of sub judice matters concerning Banerjee in view of the principle of the presumption of innocence and to ensure fair and impartial judicial consideration free from media sensationalism.During the hearing today, Chief Justice Chandrachud voiced concerns about admitting a request for action against a sitting judge of a high court for his remarks. To Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who was appearing for the TMC leader, the chief justice said, "You are seeking a writ of mandamus to take action against a judge for 'politically motivated' interviews. We shouldn't be issuing notice on this."The senior counsel agreed to only press for the prayer seeking a transfer of the proceedings before a single-judge bench of Justice Amrita Sinha of the Calcutta High Court. The cash-for-jobs scam case was transferred to Justice Sinha's bench from Justice Gangopadhyay's last year, in the wake of the television interview controversy. Singhvi explained, "Justice Gangopadhyay has now alleged that Justice Soumen Sen has spoken to Justice Amrita Sinha asking her to do this or do that. These proceedings also require to either be transferred or be taken up by Your Lordships."To this, Chief Justice Chandrachud asked, "If you are aggrieved by conduct of Justice Gangopadhyay, why should we be transferring something from Justice Amrita Sinha's bench?"Singhvi exclaimed, "As a part of the conduct, Justice Gangopadhyay has alleged that Justice Sen spoke to Justice Sinha about Abhishek Banerjee's case. She spoke to him."While the apex court refused to entertain Banerjee's prayer seeking action against Justice Gangopadhyay for his controversial remarks, it agreed to tag his request for a transfer of the proceedings before Justice Sinha with the five-judge suo motu action initiated in light of the row between Justice Gangopadhyay's bench and a division bench comprising Justice Soumen Sen. BackgroundThe controversy stems from recent judicial actions taken by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay of the Calcutta High Court. Last month, Justice Gangopadhyay defied a stay order issued by a division bench regarding his order directing a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into purported irregularities in medical admissions in West Bengal. The single judge's decision to override the division bench's directive sparked outrage. To make matters worse, Justice Gangopadhyay also made damning allegations against his fellow judge, Justice Soumen Sen, who was a part of the division bench along with Justice Uday Kumar, accusing him of 'misconduct' and harbouring political bias in favour of the state's ruling dispensation. In the unusual order, the judge wrote -"...Today I have been handed over a memorandum of appeal. Now I have to do something which is though unusual but unless I do this I think I will fail in my duty...

Supreme Court Declines Abhishek Banerjee's Plea For Action Against HC Judge Over Interviews, But Agrees To Consider Request For Transfer Of Cases

Awstika Das

Tags