E-Paper
Top court refuses to stay ED probe against TMC leader Abhishek Banerjee
Supreme Court refused to interfere with Calcutta high court order allowing central agencies to probe Abhishek Banerjee in SSC scam case
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to interfere with a Calcutta high court order allowing central agencies to probe Trinamool Congress (TMC) general secretary and MP Abhishek Banerjee in the multi-crore School Service Commission recruitment scam, saying that doing so may “stultify” the investigation in the case.
The court, however, allowed Abhishek, who is also the nephew of West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee, to seek available remedies under the law. It also dismissed a cost of ₹25 lakh imposed by the high court while junking the TMC leader’s petition.
“At this stage, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order (of May 18) since consequence of doing so will be to stultify the investigation at an incipient stage,” a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and justice PS Narasimha said.
“We clarify that in the event the petitioner takes recourse to remedies available to him under law, including the remedy of Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the observations made by the high court in its April 13 and May 18 orders shall not come in the way. An accused can file a petition in the high court under Section 482 CrPC to quash a pending criminal proceeding to prevent abuse of the process of Court or to secure ends of justice,” it added.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is probing alleged irregularities in the recruitment of Group C and Group D staff, as well as teachers, in government-sponsored and aided schools on the recommendations of the West Bengal School Service Commission in 2018. ED is conducting a parallel probe into the matter.
Three TMC legislators, including former education minister Partha Chatterjee, under whose tenure the alleged irregularities took place, have been arrested so far in the case. Abhishek’s name in the case cropped up after Kuntal Ghosh, the prime accused and one of the arrested persons, alleged that central agencies were forcing him to name the former.
On May 18, a single bench of the high court allowed the central agencies to probe Abhishek. It also imposed a cost of ₹25 lakh on the TMC leader as it dismissed his petition against the probe.
Subsequently, Abhishek was summoned by ED twice and he responded to one of them. The TMC legislator later moved the top court against the high court.
The top court set aside the high court’s fine on the TMC leader. “Since this court had permitted filing of application on April 28 before the Calcutta high court, the order of cost imposed by the judge has to be deleted,” the bench said.
At the same time, the bench clarified: “Deletion of cost shall not be seen as an expression of any opinion by the court on the modalities adopted by the single judge.”
Abhishek’s counsel and senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that the high court’s directive was a violation of the top court’s April 28 order requesting the acting chief justice of the high court to assign the matter to a new bench.
The top court order was necessitated after justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, who had earlier heard and decided the case on April 13, openly made a statement against Abhishek in an interview to a news channel. The matter was subsequently posted before justice Amrita Sinha who delivered the same verdict as justice Gangopadhyay, on May 18.
Singhvi questioned the verdict, saying the high court said it is not willing to revisit the earlier order of April 13 by applying the principle of res judicata – a legal term that suggests an issue before the court stands settled by an earlier judgment/order.
According to the lawyer, the high court judge could not rely on an earlier order after the top court, placing the matter before another bench.
“Can the court allow ED to go on a rampage based on an allegation. The problem is that ED is considering it (the case in the high court) as a flowing Ganges and jumps into it to wash its hands. There is some law and discipline in this country and this happens just because I am a politician. We know there is a political animus against me,” he said.
The top court, however, noted that the high court gave additional reasons to arrive at its conclusion.
“Once we concede they (ED) have an independent power to investigate, we cannot interfere and stultify an investigation. They have issued summons. Can we examine the validity of the summons. You have other remedies,” the bench pointed out to Singhvi.
Additional solicitor general (ASG) SV Raju, who appeared for ED, said: “We have found a sum of ₹350 crore passing hands. We are investigating him and have found proceeds of crime. He has refused to cooperate with the investigation citing the case before this court.”
The law officer further submitted that this is not a “simple” matter but a case where a former minister in the state and his aide was found with ₹48.8 crore cash. A scam of such enormous scale involving crores of money is not possible without the blessing of the people in power, he argued, adding that the proceeds of crime in such cases are seen to pass through numerous hands.
Reacting to the top court’s order, TMC state general secretary Kunal Ghosh said: “The BJP is using all federal agencies to keep TMC’s top leaders under pressure because it cannot defeat us politically.”
