KOLKATA: The Calcutta High Court continued its hearing in Narada case on Monday. CBI had sought the transfer of the trial and to declare that the hearing in the special court on May 17 –when interim bail was granted to four accused TMC leaders— was vitiated on account of mob pressure.
On Monday, the defense counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi—appearing for the accused—opposed the arguments put forth by Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta regarding 'mobocracy.'
Singhvi argued that if democratic protests become a ground to say that court proceedings are vitiated, no judgment would remain safe. He insisted that the CBI had no material 'to show mobocracy.' Singhvi stated that 'when people are outraged, they protest.' He insisted that such protests are 'signs of a democracy.' He also clarified that the Law Minister was not present in the court room. When Acting Chief Justice Bindal asked why the Law Minister went to the Court that day, Singhvi stated that the minister's presence in the court complex was an indication of his faith on judiciary and his support to the colleagues. Meanwhile, Justice I.P. Mukerji stated that the CBI was not challenging the bail order on merits. "If a protest is peaceful then it is not Mobocracy. Mobocracy suggests highly illegal action by mob. It is a question of fact. Was there such Mobocracy? Justice Mukerji asked Singhvi.
Referring to tampering of evidence, Singhvi also argued that the accused had always co-operated with the CBI.