Reduced to a mockery: In letter, judge slams Calcutta HC's Narada case handling

Kolkata: A senior judge of the Calcutta high court has written a letter to all judges of the court – including the acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal – questioning the manner in which the transfer plea of the CBI was listed before a division bench in the Narada case and the staying of bail granted by a CBI court to four politicians, including two Bengal ministers.

Justice Arindam Sinha says in the letter, a copy of which was tweeted by senior advocate and activist Prashant Bhushan, that the high court must get its act together.

"Our conduct is unbecoming of the majesty the high court commands. We have been reduced to a mockery. As such, I am requesting all of us to salvage the situation by taking such steps, including convening a full court, if necessary, for the purpose of re-affirming [the] sanctity of our Rules and our unwritten code of conduct," he wrote.

The letter, which Justice Sinha sent on May 24, says that the manner in which the court dealt with the CBI's plea, opposing bail given to TMC ministers Subrata Mukherjee and Firhad Hakim, TMC MLA Madan Mitra, and former Kolkata Mayor Sovan Chatterjee, was dealt with was cause for him to put pen to paper.

All of them were arrested by the CBI in the Narada case on May 17. On the same day, a special CBI court had granted interim bail, which was stayed by the division bench of the high court in a late hearing. They were later placed under house arrest.

Justice Sinha raises a number of questions on procedural gaps in the high court admitting the CBI's plea. He says the rules require a motion seeking transfer to be heard by a single judge.

The CBI asked the HC to transfer the trial to itself and also to declare the proceedings in the CBI court on May 17 as "a nullity in the eyes of the law, and conduct the proceedings afresh", according to a media report. 

e CBI court had granted bail to the four leaders "under the cloud of mobocracy, pressure, threat and violence and is a nullity in the eyes of law", referring to the TMC's dharna against the arrests.

"However, the first Division Bench took up the matter treating it to be a writ petition. The application, if the communication made on 17th May, 2021 can be considered as one, is by the Investigating Agency/Prosecution against accused persons. It could not and was not treated as a Public Interest Litigation," the high court judge says.

Justice Sinha says that while "the mob factor may be a ground on merits for adjudication of the motion", he asks if the first division bench could have taken the CBI's plea and heard it as a writ petition.

The "mob factor" the judge is referring to could be the fact that the TMC leaders' arrest had led to protests by Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee outside the Kolkata CBI offices with hundreds of party workers.

The judge also asks whether the high court could exercise power in the matter of transfer of a criminal case "on its own initiative" and if it could have passed the order for stay.

The judge also questions the high court's May 21 order, which said the four accused should be put under house arrest even as acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Arijit Banerjee differed in their opinion: the former favoured house arrest while the latter was in favour of granting bail. Acting CJ Rajesh Bindal constituted a five-judge bench to hear the plea, which on Friday (May 28) granted bail to the four accused. Justice Sinha also questions this decision, saying that when judges of a division bench differ on any points, it is referred to a third judge.

Calling for a full court to be convened, Justice Sinha says it should "include consideration as to whether by citing Covid, we can stop coming to court and conduct its business from wherever we are". He further adds: "The accompanying question would be as to how we have made the rules of our conditions of service redundant, citing COVID-19."With agency inputs