The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition by the West Bengal authorities in opposition to the order of a division bench of the Calcutta High Court, which dismissed its single bench order staying prison proceedings in opposition to BJP MLA Suvendu Adhikari. went. The high courtroom mentioned the order of the only bench of the excessive courtroom has already been challenged earlier than it (Supreme Court) and it thought of it on deserves and handed an order on December 13 final 12 months.
A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna instructed senior advocate Maneka Guruswamy, showing for the West Bengal authorities, that when every thing was argued earlier than the Supreme Court right here, there was no query of submitting a letter patent attraction earlier than a Calcutta division bench. Where from. High Court.
“We heard the attraction in opposition to it intimately on the order of the Single Judge Bench of the Calcutta High Court on September 6 final 12 months and disposed of the matter. Now, we can not go on the identical challenge again and again. Sorry, we do that. Cannot entertain,” the bench mentioned.
Guruswamy mentioned that on December 13 final 12 months, the apex courtroom had not expressed any opinion on deserves.
She mentioned {that a} comparable matter is pending earlier than the apex courtroom and therefore, the courtroom can challenge discover and tag it with that case.
The bench mentioned that the West Bengal authorities is already earlier than the courtroom in that matter and therefore it will not wish to tag the matter.
On September 6 final 12 months, a single bench of the Calcutta High Court had granted interim aid to the officer in opposition to summons issued by the Crime Investigation Department (CID) of the state police in reference to the investigation into the demise of his bodyguard.
On December 13 final 12 months, the apex courtroom had refused to intervene with the September 6 High Court order, which had restrained the police from taking any coercive motion in opposition to the officer in prison instances associated to the unnatural demise of his bodyguard. .
The CID had requested the officer to seem earlier than him in reference to its probe into the homicide case registered by the guard’s widow in 2021, however the BJP legislators have filed a number of petitions pending earlier than the excessive courtroom difficult the FIR in opposition to him. Citing absenteeism, and political engagement
The proceedings in opposition to the officer had been stayed by a single choose excessive courtroom bench in reference to three instances associated to the demise of a bodyguard in an alleged political conflict in Nandigram and one other prison case of snatching registered in Contai.
While permitting investigation into an alleged job rip-off case registered at Maniktala police station in Kolkata and a case of alleged risk to police in Tamluk, the courtroom had directed that no coercive motion ought to be taken in opposition to him in respect of those instances. might be completed.
He isn’t a named accused within the instances registered at Contai and Maniktala police stations.
While directing the state authorities to tell about any additional FIR registered in opposition to the officer, the bench had directed that the state must take permission of the courtroom in all such instances earlier than arresting him or taking any coercive motion in opposition to him. .
The High Court had requested the BJP chief to co-operate with the investigating authorities in respect of the 2 instances by which the investigation would proceed, whereas making it clear that the investigators would, so far as attainable, accommodate them, in the event that they had been to make any statements. There is a have to ship, at a spot and time handy to them, in view of their public obligations.
,
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS
