Nominal Index 1. Bengal State Table Tennis Association & Ors. v Malda District Table Tennis Association & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 1412. Soumendu Adhikari v. State of West Bengal 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 1423. In the matter of: Parimal Barui 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 1434. Madhu Singh v. The State of West Bengal & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 1445. Indranil Mukherjee v. State of West Bengal and Ors...
Nominal Index
1. Bengal State Table Tennis Association & Ors. v Malda District Table Tennis Association & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 141
2. Soumendu Adhikari v. State of West Bengal 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 142
3. In the matter of: Parimal Barui 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 143
4. Madhu Singh v. The State of West Bengal & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 144
5. Indranil Mukherjee v. State of West Bengal and Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 144
6. Subrata Kumar Samanta v. The State of West Bengal & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 145
7. Bidyut Kumar Mondal v. Pankaj Sarkar & Anr 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 146
8. Rupa Das v. The State of West Bengal & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 147
9. Snigdha Datta (Basu) v. The State of West Bengal & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 148
10. In the matter of Kapil Raj 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 149
11. Sanat Kumar Ghosh & Ors. v. Rajesh Kumar Sinha & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 150
12. Nur Afsar Mandal v. Visva Bharati and Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 151
13. Ideal Unique Realtors Private Limited & Anr. versus Union of India & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 152
Orders/Judgments
1. Calcutta High Court Imposes ₹25K Cost On Party For Seeking Repeated Adjournments
Case Title: Bengal State Table Tennis Association & Ors. v Malda District Table Tennis Association & Ors
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 141
The Calcutta High Court on Friday imposed costs to the tune of Rs 25,000 on a party for seeking repeated adjournments. A Bench of Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and Kesang Doma Bhutia noted that the appellants had sought several adjournments. But despite the accommodating orders the Court had passed, they again sought an adjournment for the fourth time. "This is the fourth occasion when adjournment has been sought for by the appellants. We have passed several orders from 18.04.2022 to accommodate the appellants. At the time of third call today, adjournment is again sought for on behalf of the appellants. Since today is the last date of the Circuit bench, we are unable to keep the matter after recess owing to our respective Single Bench lists," the Court observed. Accordingly, the Bench imposed costs and ordered the appellants to pay Rs 25,000 to the District Legal Services Authorities, Jalpaiguri within a period of seven days.
Case Title: Soumendu Adhikari v. State of West Bengal
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 142
The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday directed Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), New Delhi to conduct a forensic audit of the CCTV cameras that were used during the recently concluded Contai Municipality elections. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj while reading out the operative portion of the order on Tuesday observed that notwithstanding the constitutional bar under Article 243-ZG (b) of the Constitution of India, such a direction is required in the 'larger public interest' and to uphold democratic principles."..we are of the opinion that not only to ascertain the compliance of earlier orders of this Court but in the larger public interest and to uphold democratic principles, it is necessary to get forensic audit of CCTV footage of Contai Municipal Election done", the Court underscored. Accordingly, the Court directed the State Election Commission to send the CCTV footage of Contai Municipal Election for forensic audit to CFSL, Delhi within 10 days
Case Title: In the matter of: Parimal Barui
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 143
The Calcutta High Court came down heavily on an Investigating Officer while adjudicating upon an anticipatory bail application in connection with a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). A Bench comprising # expressed strong reservations over the conduct of the concerned Investigation Officer after being apprised that the officer had refused to examine the petitioner in response to a notice under Section 67 of the NDPS Act in the absence of the petitioner's identification proof. "An investigation is in progress. It is intriguing that the Investigating Officer requires the identification proof of the person appearing before him in response to a notice under Section 67 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. He is not aware of the person who is required to be interviewed thereunder in absence of his identification proof", the Court underscored. Further opining that the conduct of the Investigating Officer requires the attention of his superiors, the Court remarked, "The conduct of the Investigating Officer, requires attention of his superiors".
Case Title: Madhu Singh v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 144
The Calcutta High Court directed the Director General of Police, West Bengal to initiate departmental proceedings against concerned police officers for misleading the Court and further handed over the investigation to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), West Bengal. Justice Rajasekhar Mantha was adjudicating upon a case involving serious offences under Section 365 (kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person), Section 354B (Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe) and other provisions of the IPC. The Court further expressed reservations over the fact that the concerned report had not been Superintendent of Police, Baruipur Police Station himself and accordingly remarked, "It is not however understood as to why the Superintendent of Police, Baruipur Police Station has not signed the report himself. If the Additional Superintendent of Police was signing the report on behalf of the Office of the Superintendent of Police, the same shall have to be indicated." Opining that departmental proceedings must be ignited against the Investigating Officer and other officers responsible for such a lapse in investigation, the Court ordered, "This Court is, therefore, of the view that the entire file as regards the conduct of investigation by ASI, Arnab Chakraborty must be looked into by a higher authority..The Director General of Police, West Bengal shall call for the records and consider drawing up of appropriate departmental proceeding against the ASI, Arnab Chakraborty and any other person that the Director General of Police, West Bengal may feel is responsible for misleading this Court."
Case Title: Indranil Mukherjee v. State of West Bengal and Ors
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 144
The Calcutta High Court has recently held that an order of interim compensation awarded under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Act) cannot be recovered from the estate of a deceased accused, who died before the conclusion of the trial. Justice Kausik Chanda observed that the order of interim compensation is dependent on the outcome of the trial and accordingly underscored, "There is no finality attached to such interim order of compensation and no right is crystallised in favour of the complainant by dint of such interim order of compensation. The order of interim compensation, which is passed in the aid of final compensation, will cease to exist when the trial comes to an end due to the death of the accused since in such eventuality there cannot be any scope to adjudicate the innocence or the guilt of the accused in the trial." The Court further opined that in the event of the death of an accused, compensation awarded under Section 138 of the Act can be recovered from the estate of a deceased accused however an interim compensation awarded under Section 143A of the Act cannot be recovered from the estate of a deceased accused.
Case Title: Subrata Kumar Samanta v. The State of West Bengal & Ors
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 145
The Calcutta High Court observed that West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited has the right to install electric polls on private land and can also take necessary action in respect of any property in the event it is not possible to take the electric connection in-question over an alternative passage. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj observed, "..this Court is of the view that the respondent no.5 is under no obligation to not install electric poles and can take necessary action in respect of any property in the event it is not possible to take the electric connection in-question over an alternative passage." However leave was granted to the appellant to approach the Distribution Company with a formal application for shifting the electric pole and it was further underscored that in such an event the appellant should be willing to deposit the entire shifting charges for installation of a new electric pole.
Case Title: Bidyut Kumar Mondal v. Pankaj Sarkar & Anr
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 146
The Calcutta High Court imposed costs to the tune of Rs 25,000 on an alleged contemnor for not taking steps for compliance of an earlier order for a period of 7 years despite a contempt application being filed back in 2015. Justice Shekhar B. Saraf also came down heavily on the practice of government authorities of not complying with orders of the Court for years on end and thereafter informing the Court that an appeal is to be filed whenever the Court presses for compliance of the order. "The malaise in the system of not challenging the orders, accepting the same and thereafter not complying with the same is seen in hundreds of matters that are being filed. The Authorities of the State choose not to comply with the order in blatant disregard of the orders passed by the High Court and drag their feet in the matter for years on end. When the Court presses for compliance of the order, the Court is informed that an appeal has either just been filed a few days back or is going to be filed immediately", the Court underscored. Depreciating the conduct of the government pleader for seeking an adjournment on this ground, the Court observed, "The present situation is akin to the above and the prayer of the Government Pleader seeking an adjournment in this matter is deprecated by this Court. The system requires change and unless costs are imposed upon the present alleged contemnor, I do not see any improvement taking place."
8. Calcutta High Court Allows 17 Yr Old Rape Victim To Undergo Medical Termination Of Pregnancy
Case Title: Rupa Das v. The State of West Bengal & Ors
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 147
The Calcutta High Court permitted a 17 year old rape victim to undergo medical termination of pregnancy after taking into consideration the report filed by the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) and the report of the concerned Medical Board. Justice Rajasekhar Mantha took on record the report filed by the CWC addressed to the concerned Public Prosecutor, West Bengal wherein it had been averred that the minor victim girl had expressed her desire to undergo medical termination of pregnancy. The veracity of the desire of the minor girl had also been confirmed by six officials including the Chairperson of the Child Welfare Committee, Nadia. Permitting the minor victim to undergo medical termination of pregnancy, the Court directed, "In that view of the matter, subject to the verification of her health, afresh by the required number of qualified medical practitioners, the minor girl shall be permitted to undergo medical termination of pregnancy, under the care and guidance of her mother." The Court had previously directed the Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOH), Nadia to constitute a medical board to ascertain the physical and mental condition of the victim girl and also determine whether the continuation of pregnancy would in any way harm the victim or the foetus.
Case Title: Snigdha Datta (Basu) v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 148
The Calcutta High Court allowed a government school teacher to seek a transfer to a school nearer to her residence after taking into account the report filed by a Medical Board which had advised her to avoid long journeys owing to her health condition. Opining that the school teacher cannot be made to risk her life, Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay underscored, "..it is observed that a lady teacher with specific advice of the doctors of a Medical Board of a Government Hospital to avoid journey, cannot be compelled to attend the school which is at a distance of 142 kilometers. To and fro journey is 284 kilometers. Even if the petitioner arranges an accommodation nearer to the school, it cannot be said that she will never come to her in-laws' house or her father's residence from the rented house in school area. At the same time going against the advice of the doctors of the Medical Board means taking risk of her life." Opining that her service period being less than 5 years cannot stand as an impediment in the way of her transfer, the Court observed, "In such a situation when the Medical Board in their report dated 25.08.2021 advised her to avoid journey, it is immaterial whether the petitioner is short of some months service from five years as on date. The petitioner has not been transferred till date and that is why I am considering the present tenure of her service, it is slightly below five years. However, when advise is to avoid journey after medical test by not an individual doctor but a Medical Board the service period cannot stand in the way for transfer."
Case Title: In the matter of Kapil Raj
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 149
The Calcutta High Court imposed a stay for 3 weeks on orders of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas wherein the Joint Director of Enforcement Directorate (ED) Kapil Raj had been directed to provide a voice sample to the Kolkata Police in connection with an audiotape leak case involving Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee. Pertinently, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju appearing on behalf of Raj submitted that the Kolkata Police had allegedly forged a copy of the impugned order before sending it to him. He apprised the Court that the impugned order had clearly stated that the voice sample of the concerned ED Official could be taken subject to consent given by the officer. Opining that the matter needs to be heard at length since a serious allegation has been levelled, Justice Jay Sengupta observed, "A perusal of the application for collection of voice sample of the ED Official renders it necessary to determine whether a case was made out for allowing such a prayer. Besides, a serious allegation has been leveled by the petitioner that an order passed by the learned Magistrate was forged. Therefore, the matter needs to be heard at length." Granting a stay on the impugned orders for a period of 3 weeks, the Court further directed, "The operation of the impugned orders, so far as they relate to the direction to collect voice sample of the ED Official, shall remain stayed till three weeks after the ensuing summer vacation."
Case Title: Sanat Kumar Ghosh & Ors. v. Rajesh Kumar Sinha & Ors.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 150
The Calcutta High Court issued notices to the Chief Secretary, Principal Secretary of the Transport Department and the Principal Secretary of the Finance Department of the Government of West Bengal in a petition seeking initiation of civil contempt in a matter pertaining to the implementation of a Pension Scheme for employees of the South Bengal State Transport Corporation (SBSTC). Justice Arindam Mukherjee ordered, "I direct issuance of Rule against Rajesh Kumar Sinha, the Principal Secretary, Transport Department, Government of West Bengal, Paribahan Bhawan, 12, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700001; H.K. Dwivedi, the Chief Secretary, Government of West Bengal, having his office at "NABANNA", 325, Sarat Chatterjee Road, P.O. Shibpur, Howrah – 711102; and, Dr. Manoj Pant, the Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of West Bengal, having his office at "NABANNA", 325, Sarat Chatterjee Road, P.O. Shibpur, Howrah – 711102."
Case Title: Nur Afsar Mandal v. Visva Bharati and Ors
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 151
The Calcutta High Court set aside an order passed by the Registrar (Acting) of Visva-Bharati University discontinuing the services of a casual labourer on the ground of breach of the principles of natural justice. Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya ordered, "The facts in the present case do not justify the impugned action. It is vigilante-justice without the factual bulwark to support it. This Court, being equally in the dark (as the petitioner) on the material forming the basis of the charge and the perceived exigency, is therefore unable to accept that the University had good grounds to summarily discontinue the services of the petitioner." Highlighting the need to preserve the principles of natural justice in order to protect constitutional ethos, the Court underscored, "Fair play in action is the law's most recognizable face, it evens the scales of injustice and strengthens its moral core. Subverting the rules of natural justice unsettles the very bedrock on which laws are built and shakes the constitutional foundation of equal protection of the laws. Attractive as it may sound, rough and ready justice serves only those who mete it out and not the person at the receiving end. Fair play is all about points and counter-points between two opposing parties and not a volley of unidirectional projectiles, ricocheting and bouncing in the dark echo- chamber of procedure."
Case Title: Ideal Unique Realtors Private Limited & Anr. versus Union of India & Ors.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 152
The Calcutta High Court has quashed the spot memos issued to the assessee by the audit department and ruled them unenforceable since earlier proceedings initiated by the revenue department on the same issue were not completed. The Bench, consisting of Justices T. S. Sivagnanam and Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, observed that different wings of the same department had been issuing notices and summons to the assessee without taking any of the earlier proceedings to a logical end. The appellant/ assessee Ideal Unique Realtors Private Limited filed an appeal before the Calcutta High Court challenging the jurisdiction of the Sr. Audit Officer in issuing a "spot memo" against the appellants. The appellants submitted before the High Court that the Director General of Goods and Services Tax, DGGI, Kolkata had issued summons to the appellants for which the appellants had submitted their reply. Thereafter, the DGGI had issued two more notices on the same issue. The appellants added that in response to the summons, the appellants had appeared before the authority and had submitted the requisite documents. The appellants contended that in spite of the same, the revenue officials had issued spot memos to the appellants on the same issue.
Important Developments
Case Title: Rokan Ali Molla v. State of West Bengal and Ors.
The Calcutta High Court sought the State government's response in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition questioning the conduct of Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee in extending compensation and government jobs for the kin of the victims of the violence that erupted in Birbhum district of West Bengal. The incident, allegedly in retaliation to the murder of local All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Bhadu Sheikh, claimed 8 lives including that of two children. The Court vide order dated March 25 had ordered a CBI investigation into the incident of violence. Thereafter, on April 8, the Court had also directed the CBI to probe into the murder of TMC leader Bhadu Sheikh, opining that the material on record prima facie suggests that there is a close relationship and linkage between the two incidents. Senior advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya appearing for the petitioner submitted before a Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj that the Chief Minister had attempted to 'influence witnesses' by handing over government jobs and compensation to the family members of the victims. Taking cognisance of the grievance raised, the Court directed the State government to file an affidavit-in-opposition within 4 weeks. Any reply to such an affidavit-in-opposition was ordered to be filed by the petitioner within 2 weeks.
Case Title: Suvendu Adhikari v. The Hon'ble Speaker, West Bengal Legislative Assembly
The Calcutta High Court sought sought response from West Bengal Assembly Speaker Biman Bandyopadhyay in a writ petition challenging his decision to suspend BJP MLA and Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari from the Assembly for future sessions this year. Five BJP MLAs, including Suvendu Adhikari, were suspended by the West Bengal Assembly Speaker on March 28 for their alleged unruly conduct in the House. Adhikari, along with BJP legislators Dipak Burman, Shankar Ghosh, Manoj Tigga and Narahari Mahato, were suspended by the Speaker for future sessions this year. The Assembly had witnessed pandemonium on the day as ruling TMC and BJP MLAs scuffled after saffron party legislators demanded a statement by Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee over the "worsening" law and order situation in the state. Justice Rajasekhar Mantha was apprised by senior counsel Jaydip Kar appearing for Adhikari that Adhikari and 5 other BJP MLAs were communicated vide an order on March 31 that they had been suspended by the Speaker from the Assembly for the remaining period of this session. Taking cognisance of the grievance raised, the Court directed Advocate General S.N Mookherjee to file an affidavit-in-opposition on or before May 2. Any reply was directed to be filed on or before May 4. The matter has been listed for further hearing on May 5 at 10:30 am.
Case Title: Salem Khan v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
The Calcutta High Court directed the father of deceased student leader Anis Khan to file an affidavit raising objections to the report filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) pertaining to the investigation into the death of student activist Anis Khan. Anish Khan was found dead at his home in Amta block in Howrah district in the early hours of Saturday, February 19, 2022 under mysterious circumstances. Justice Rajasekhar Mantha on the last date of hearing had taken on record a detailed 82-page report filed by the State government indicating the steps taken by the SIT towards the investigation. Senior advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya appearing for the petitioner apprised the Court that the SIT report can best be described as an enquiry report and is not an investigation report. The Court opined that the State must be notified as to the exact grounds on which the investigation report is being challenged and accordingly directed the petitioner to file an affidavit seeking exception to the investigation report filed by the SIT within a period of 1 week. "Let a formal exception be taken on affidavit by Mr. Bhattacharya's client in respect of the investigation report and the same should be filed within a period of one week from date with prior service on the learned Advocate General", the Court directed.
Case Title: Biplab Kumar Chowdhury v. Union of India and Ors
The Calcutta High Court directed the Centre to file a report in a sealed cover on the investigation into the incident of mid-air turbulence experienced by Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee's chartered flight on March 4. On March 4, Banerjee was returning to Kolkata from Varanasi after an election campaign. She boarded a chartered flight but faced air turbulence just before landing at the Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose International airport. The Chief Minister reportedly suffered injuries in her back after the incident subsequent to which the doctors had advised her to take rest. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajrashi Bharadwaj was adjudicating upon a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition seeking a probe into the incident.Accordingly, the Court directed the Centre to file a report of the Central Security Agency in a sealed cover containing details of the probe into the alleged incident on the next date of hearing which is slated to take place on July 18.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition has been filed in the Calcutta High Court seeking a probe by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) into the incident of crude bomb blast in West Bengal's Malda district on Sunday. Five school children were reportedly injured after the crude bombs they were playing with, mistaking those for balls, exploded in Kaliachak's Gopalnagar village close to the India-Bangladesh border on Sunday. The concerned counsel mentioned the matter before a Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj on Tuesday seeking leave to file the PIL. The Court was also apprised that the affected children are merely 4-5 years old and that they have been critically injured as a result of the blast. It was further averred that the incident falls within the category of a 'scheduled offence' under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 and thus a probe by the NIA was also sought. Pursuant to the submission, the Chief Justice orally remarked, "Give your mentioning slip, we will consider". The matter is likely to be heard sometime this week.
Law Clerks-cum-Research Assistants of the Calcutta High Court have written to Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava seeking enhanced pay structure. The letter averred that prices of essential commodities are on a steep hike and that they do not receive anything by way of inflation rebate. It was also underscored that as contractual employees, they have to sustain on their salaries that have remained stagnant for the past 6 years. It may be noted that the pay structure for Law Clerk-cum-Research Assistants at the Calcutta High Court currently stands at Rs 35,000 per month. "Your Lordship is well aware that prices of essential commodities are on a steep hike and that we do not receive anything by way of inflation rebate. As contractual employees we have to subsist only on our salary which is fixed/stagnant for the last six years", the letter reads.
7. Centre Notifies Appointment Of Five Additional Judges Of Calcutta High Court As Permanent Judges
The Central Government on Wednesday notified the appointment of five Additional Judges of Calcutta High Court as Permanent Judges of the Court. They are as follows- Justice Kesang Doma Bhutia, Justice Rabindranath Samanta, Justice Sugato Majumdar, Justice Bivas Pattanayak and Justice Ananda Kumar Mukherjee. The Supreme Court Collegium had approved the proposal for appointing the five Additional Judges of Calcutta High Court as Permanent Judges of the Court vide notification dated 19th April, 2022.
Case Title: XYZ, the victim minor and disabled child through his father v. The State of West Bengal & Ors
The Calcutta High Court directed the concerned State authorities to apprise the Court about the steps taken in the investigation of a case pertaining to the torture inflicted upon an autistic minor child while he was in the care and custody of a safe home in Durgapur, West Bengal. Justice Rajasekhar Mantha was apprised by the father of the minor victim that despite a complaint being registered dated June 12, 2019 addressed to Aurobindo Police Station, Durgapur, the FIR has not been registered nor have any consequent steps been taken. In the complaint, the father had alleged that his minor autistic child had been tortured and had also faced atrocities while he was in the care and custody of the Happy Home for Handicapped, Durgapur. Directing the concerned authorities to apprise the Court about the steps taken so far in addressing the complaint, the Court observed, "Let instructions be taken on behalf of the respondents to indicate what are steps taken pursuant to the complaint of the writ petitioner."