Supreme Court Dismisses WB Govt's Plea Challenging HC Order Granting Protection To BJP's Suvendu Adhikari

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to interfere with the order of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court declining to entertain an LPA against a Single Judge decision staying criminal proceedings initiated against BJP MLA and Leader of the Opposition in West Bengal Assembly Suvendu Adhikari."We will not entertain this for the simple reason that the order of the single judge was challenged under Article 136 before us. We have dealt with the challenge on merits. Where is the question of going in an LPA when you have argued everything before us in SLP? We had dealt with the challenge to the same judgment which was disposed off on December 13, 2021. The matter was argued at length. What was challenged in SLP was the order of 6 September 2021, the order of the single judge. The order on merits before us was challenged. Where is the question of now filing an LPA. We have dealt with the order on merits", observed Justice D. Y. Chandrachud.Senior Advocate Maneka Guruswamy, for the petitioner-state of West Bengal, advanced, "In the order of December 13, 2021, The court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the issue which will arise before the writ petition in the High Court. There are two issues here. This only pertains to the issue of whether an LPA which arises from the writ petition jurisdiction under 226 and which the court finds under Article 21 qualifies as criminal jurisdiction or not. Your lordships are seized of a similar issue in Anup Majee's case and have issued notice there".She suggested that the bench may even consider tagging the instant SLP with the Anup Majee matter (West Bengal coal scam probe)The judge observed that the state of West Bengal is already before the Court in the Anup Majee matter and refused to accede to the request.The bench then proceeded to dictate its order- "The order of the learned single judge of the High Court of Calcutta dated 6 September 2021 in WP (...) was challenged before this court in SLP. The interim order of the single judge was upheld in the following terms by the 13 December 2021 order while disposing off the SLP- (...). "The present special leave petition arises out of a judgment of the division bench of the High Court in an LPA declining to entertain the LPA against the order of the single judge. Senior advocate Maneka Guruswamy, for the petitioner, submits that the only issue which is raised in the instant SLP is in regard to the maintainability of the LPA. In our view, it is unnecessary to consider the same. Since the very order of the single judge of 6 September 2021 was assailed before this court in an SLP, the issue with regard to the maintainability of LPA is of insignificance. Parties would be governed by the order which was passed by this court on 13 December 2021. In view of the above clarification, it is not necessary or appropriate to entertain the present special leave petition".The Calcutta High Court had on September 6 extended interim relief to Adhikari in the context of Crime Investigation Department (CID) summons in connection with the probe into the death of his bodyguard Subhobrata Chakraborty.On December 13, 2021, bench of Justices D. Y. Chandrachud and A. S. Bopanna was hearing the state of West Bengal's and Chakraborty's wife's challenge to the order of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha issuing a stay on proceedings initiated against Adhikari in respect of cases registered at Contai police station and the Nandigram police station on March 18. Against this order, the state of West Bengal had filed a batch of intra-Court appeals before a Bench comprising Justices Subrata Talukdar and Kesang Doma Bhutia. The Bench, dismissing the same, had observed, "This batch of analogous intra-Court appeals are held to be not maintainable".On December 13, 2021, Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandyopadhyay, for the state of West Bengal, submitted, "Can this sort of blanket stay order be passed by the single judge in view of your lordships' orders in Neeharika Infrastructure (2021). In the impugned order, the single judge says that in the instant case, there is prima facie evidence of abuse of police machinery by registration of cases based on concoction. And this is on the very first day of the hearing, without calling for any affidavit! How can the court come to such a finding? And the court says that there shall be a stay of all proceedings!""Have you filed your counter before the High Court?", asked Justice Chandrachud."No! Everything has been stalled, every proceeding. No coercive action shall be taken against them? Nothing will be done? The cases against him are that he abused police officers!", urged Mr. Bandhopadhyay.Justice Chandrachud pointed out that one of the allegations is of theft of tarpaulin sheets, and another about suicide committed by a personal security officer in 2018. The judge also observed that Neeharika was a case where High Courts do not give reasons for a 'no coercive steps' order, while here, the High Court has given reasons at the ...

Supreme Court Dismisses WB Govt's Plea Challenging HC Order Granting Protection To BJP's Suvendu Adhikari

Mehal Jain

Tags