Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Top Stories

Narada Case : Supreme Court To Hear Pleas Of West Bengal Govt, Law Minister On June 22; Urges Calcutta High Court To Defer Hearing

Radhika Roy & Akshita Saxena
18 Jun 2021 8:35 AM GMT
Narada Case : Supreme Court To Hear Pleas Of West Bengal Govt, Law Minister On June 22; Urges Calcutta High Court To Defer Hearing
x

The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned till Tuesday(June 22) the hearing on the appeals filed by the State of West Bengal and the State Law Minister, Moloy Ghatak, against a 9th June order of the Calcutta High Court wherein it had refused to take on record the Affidavits filed by them in the CBI's transfer plea in the Narada Scam case.While adjourning the hearing at the request of CBI, ...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned till Tuesday(June 22) the hearing on the appeals filed by the State of West Bengal and the State Law Minister, Moloy Ghatak, against a 9th June order of the Calcutta High Court wherein it had refused to take on record the Affidavits filed by them in the CBI's transfer plea in the Narada Scam case.

While adjourning the hearing at the request of CBI,  a vacation bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian said that it hopes that the Calcutta High Court will defer its hearing in the meantime.. "Matter will be taken up on Tuesday. In the meantime, we hope the HC will not hear the matter on Monday or Tuesday," it said.

A 5-judge bench of the Calcutta High Court is slated to hear the matter on Monday. Significantly, the CBI has concluded its argument before the High Court while arguments for accused are underway.

As soon as the case was taken by the Supreme Court bench today,  Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CBI, sought an adjournment on the ground that copy of the appeal was not served on him. "I am not on caveat. I came to know from the newspapers that this was filed. If my learned friend could give me a copy, then this could be taken on Monday," he submitted.

However, the Bench observed that if the matter is adjourned, then hearing of the High Court will also have to be deferred. It also opined that instead of entertaining the appeal against an interim order, it can give the State liberty to file an application later.

Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Law Minister, replied, "It is absolutely essential that this Affidavit is taken on record. The accused were asked how they knew what happened outside (during protests) and therefore we filed this affidavit to indicate the law and order situation.

Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the State Government, submitted that Respondents have a right to file their affidavit within 4 weeks. "Under Rule 13A, I have a right to file an Affidavit. It was a courtesy. CBI files an Affidavit. As a courtesy, we never took permission. CBI also never took permission," he argued.

It may be recalled that the CBI is seeking the transfer of Narada case hearing from the Special CBI Court at Kolkata on the ground that the there is 'mobocracy' in the state. The CBI is highlighting the mass protests led by Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and Law Minister Moloy Ghatak on May 17 against the arrest of 4 TMC leaders in the Narada case.

The State Government and the Law Minister said that they have a right to defend the CBI allegations before the High Court.

The 9th June order of the Calcutta High Court observed that the Chief Minister, Law Minister and the State had "waited for the arguments in the case to be substantially completed before seeking to place on record their pleadings in response…It is nothing else but filling the lacunae or supporting the accused. That is why, even the learned Counsels appearing for the accused are also supporting the prayer made by the State for taking these belated affidavits on record".

It was further noted by the High Court that, "The Respondents have taken a calculated risk in not filing their affidavits at the right time, now they cannot be allowed to do so at their own whims and fancies, whenever they wish to do the same. Urgency of the matter could be appreciated on behalf of the accused, who were in custody but it cannot apparently be on behalf of the State, hence, if the State or other persons impleaded by the CBI wanted to file their response, time could have been sought at that time and not when the arguments are at an advanced stage".

The plea filed before the Supreme Court submits that rights of the State should not be hampered, especially when the CBI was allowed to file additional affidavits. This was also argued by Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Law Minister, who submitted that it was a question of justice, and that if the affidavit was ignored, the interests of justice would not be served.

However, Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta had objected to the affidavits being taken on record in light of the arguments being completed.


Next Story
Share it