Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 84 To 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 93Nominal Index 1. Precious Trade Link Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner of State Tax 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 842. Alpine Distilleries Pvt. Ltd v. The State of West Bengal and others 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 853. Ajoy Kumar Singhania v. The State of West Bengal & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 864. Naimuddin Laskar @ Naim v. The State of...
Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 84 To 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 93
Nominal Index
1. Precious Trade Link Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner of State Tax 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 84
2. Alpine Distilleries Pvt. Ltd v. The State of West Bengal and others 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 85
3. Ajoy Kumar Singhania v. The State of West Bengal & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 86
4. Naimuddin Laskar @ Naim v. The State of West Bengal 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 87
5. Kabita Mondal (Gayen) v. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. and others 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 88
6. Kamal Nath v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 89
7. The Court on its own Motion In re: The Brutal Incident of Bogtui Village, Rampurhat, Birbhum 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 90
8. Malancha Mohinta v. Dipak Mohinta 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 91
9. Ram Sevak Lohar v. State 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 92
10. Dr. Kausik Paul v. Seacom Skills University and Others 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 93
Orders/Judgments
Case Title: Precious Trade Link Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner of State Tax
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 84
The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Md. Nizamuddin, has quashed the detention order passed by the Goods and Service Tax Department (GST) on the grounds that the opportunity of hearing was not accorded to the assessee. The petitioner/assessee has challenged the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax on the ground that the order was bad in law for the reason that the goods of the petitioners were detained without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners under the relevant provision of Section 129 of the West Bengal Goods and Service Tax Act,2017 (WBGST Act). The court ordered that the detained goods shall be released on making payment as per the amended provision of Section 129(1) of the WBGST Act and directed the petitioner to make payment within seven days from the date. On receipt of such payment, the department shall release the detained goods in question within 72 hours from receipt of payment. The court quashed the detention order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax and remanded it to the authority concerned to consider afresh and pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with the law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners or their authorised representative.
Case Title: Alpine Distilleries Pvt. Ltd v. The State of West Bengal and others
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 85
The Calcutta High Court has recently restrained the concerned Block Land and Land Reforms Officer from interfering with the possession of the land under Section 14T(3) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (Act) after noting that a person is entitled to land in excess of the ceiling area defined under Section 14M of the Act if the same is intended to be used for commercial purposes. A Bench comprising Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Rabindranath Samanta observed, "Accordingly, the respondents shall remain restraint from interfering with the possession of the land, which has/have been passed by an order of the relevant Block Land and Land Reforms Officer." However, the petitioner was restrained from creating any third party interest in respect of the land or change the nature and character thereof without obtaining prior leave of the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal. "Since it is alleged that the petitioner is holding the excess land beyond the ceiling limit provided under Section 14M of the said Act, the petitioner is restrained from creating any third party interest in respect of the same nor shall change the nature and character thereof without obtaining prior leave of the tribunal", the Court directed. It was further ordered that the correction of the record of rights shall not be made without obtaining the prior leave of the Tribunal.
Case Title: Ajoy Kumar Singhania v. The State of West Bengal & Ors
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 86
The Calcutta High Court has recently directed the District Registrar to ensure that legible copies are always provided when certified copies of a registered document is applied for otherwise the intervention of the Court will always be required for the supply of such legible copies. In the instant case, the petitioner had applied for obtaining the certified copy of a sale deed however the copy of the sale deed which had been provided to the petitioner was illegible. Subsequently, the petitioner had applied to the District Registrar to furnish a legible copy of the concerned document, however such no action had been taken on such a request. Thereafter, the instant plea had been filed. Justice Amrita Sinha observed it is evident from the photocopy of the deed supplied to the petitioner that it is absolutely illegible and accordingly remarked, "The copy of the deed which was supplied to the petitioner is absolutely illegible. Not a word from the said deed can be read." Taking into consideration the grievance raised, the Court directed, "The District Registrar is directed to ensure that when certified copy of a registered document is applied for, then legible copy should always be provided to the applicants; otherwise, the applicants will be required to approach Court for obtaining order for supplying legible copy of the document(s) they require." The order was also directed to be communicated to the District Registrar and the other Sub-Registrars within the jurisdiction to ensure compliance.
Case Title: Naimuddin Laskar @ Naim v. The State of West Bengal
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 87
The Calcutta High Court has recently granted default bail after noting that no notice of the application seeking extension of time in filing of chargesheet under Section 36A(4) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) had been served upon the accused thereby violating principles of natural justice. A Bench comprising Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Bibhas Ranjan De observed, "In an adversarial proceeding, the requirement to adhere to the principles of natural justice is imbedded in a statute governing the adjudicating process unless the same is expressly excluded by statute. The right to a fair trial is fundamental to the rule of law. Right to fair trial is recognized as a part right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Compliance with the principles of natural justice ensures a fair trial. Audi alteram partem or hear the other side is one of the fundamental pillars of the principles of natural justice. The principle audi alteram partem needs to applied at every stage of an adversarial proceeding to ensure fair trial, unless its applicability is expressly ousted by statue." The Court further underscored that Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act does not expressly exclude the application of principles of natural justice and thus an accused is entitled to notice of an application seeking extension of time to submit a chargesheet under Section 36A(4) of the NDPA Act so that he is in a position to oppose the same if need be.
Case Title: Kabita Mondal (Gayen) v. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. and others
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 88
The Calcutta High Court called upon the legislature to immediately introduce specific provisions in the Electricity Act, 2003 (2003 Act) regarding payment of compensation to victims of injury, death or damage to property caused by electrocution or to their next of kin. The Court also observed that the legislature should also consider providing for a dedicated hierarchy of forums to decide such cases and that Rules may also be formulated by the Central or State Electricity Regulatory Commissions for effective implementation of such provisions. Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya observed, "It is desirable that the legislature considers the immediate introduction of specific provisions in the Electricity Act, 2003 itself, regarding payment of compensation to victims of injury, death of damage to property caused by electrocution or their next of kin and, if deemed fit, to also consider providing for a dedicated hierarchy of forums to decide such cases. Rules in that regard may also be formulated by the Central and/or State Electricity Regulatory Commissions for effective implementation of such provisions." The Court further noted that relegating such matters of compensation to a Civil Court would aggravate the misery of the victim's kin and accordingly remarked, "The option of relegating such matters of compensation to a civil court, considering the usually sorry plight of the victim's dependants, would involve much time and resources which the applicants in such matters mostly cannot afford to spend. Civil suits, by their implicit nature and statutory structure, require oral and documentary evidence to be led and considered in detail before final disposal."
Case Title: Kamal Nath v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 89
Justice Md Nizamuddin of the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday recused himself from hearing a petition by former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Kamal Nath against the Income Tax authorities in connection with the IT department's decision to transfer his case from Kolkata to Delhi. The matter arose from income tax raids in multiple states, including West Bengal, in the premises of people allegedly linked to Nath in April 2019, when he was the chief minister of Madhya Pradesh. The raids were conducted in connection with a notice issued to the senior Congress leader by the IT authorities. On Tuesday, Justice Nizamuddin recused from hearing the matter and further ordered for the case to be placed before Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava. "On my personal ground, this matter is released from my list. Let it be placed before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice", the order read. In the instant case, Kamal Nath had moved the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-9, challenging the IT summons against him asking him to appear in New Delhi, and not in Kolkata, under which he is a tax assessee.
7. Birbhum Massacre| Calcutta HC Orders CBI Probe, SIT Asked To Stop Investigation
Case Title: The Court on its own Motion In re: The Brutal Incident of Bogtui Village, Rampurhat, Birbhum
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 90
The Calcutta High Court on Friday transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) the investigation into the violence in Birbhum district of West Bengal, in which 8 persons were killed allegedly in retaliation to the murder of local All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Bhadu Sheikh. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj on Friday observed that in the interest of justice and considering the circumstances of the instant case, the ongoing probe should be transferred to the CBI. "Having regard to the aforesaid we are of the opinion that facts and circumstances of the case demand that in the interest of justice and to instill confidence in the society and to have fair investigation to dig out the truth it is necessary to hand over the investigation to the CBI. Accordingly, we direct the State Government to forthwith hand over the investigation of the case to CBI. We also direct the State authorities to extend full cooperation to CBI in carrying out the further investigation", the Bench ordered. The State constituted Special Investigating Team (SIT) which had been carrying on its investigation till now was further ordered to not carry out any further investigation in the matter from the time the same is handed over to CBI. "In view of this order the State police authorities or SIT formed by the State will not carry out any further investigation in the matter from the time the same is handed over to CBI. CBI will not only be handed over the case papers but also the accused and suspects who were arrested in the matter and in custody", the Court ordered further. The CBI has been ordered to submit a progress report on the next date of hearing that is to take place on April 7.
Also Read: Birbhum Massacre| Calcutta HC Reserves Order, Takes On Record Case Diary
Case Title: Malancha Mohinta v. Dipak Mohinta
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 91
The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday observed that writing a letter to the husband's superior at work in good faith intimating him about a criminal case lodged against the husband for inflicting torture would not amount to criminal defamation under Section 499 of the IPC. In the instant case, the wife (petitioner) had written a letter dated May 24, 1997 to the Manager, Indian Overseas Bank intimating him that her husband who was the Assistant Manager of Overseas Bank had tortured her and driven her out of the matrimonial home and that a criminal case under Section 498A CrPC (cruelty) had been initiated against him following which he had been arrested and subsequently released on bail. The petitioner had enclosed a certified copy of the order and had requested the Manager to take such action as may be deemed fit under the facts and circumstances. Justice Ananda Kumar Mukherjee noted that the petitioner in her letter had made representation of facts which were consistent with the incidents relating to filling of cases for alleged torture. He further opined that there had been no 'embellishment of facts' and that no coercive action had been sought by the petitioner against her husband vide the letter. "There remains little to be said that the letter in question was a statement of fact instead of any imputation to harm the reputation of the opposite party", the Court observed. Opining further that the the ingredients of offence of defamation are not attracted by the contents of the letter as they are covered by the Eighth Exception laid down under Section 499 IPC, the Court underscored, "..preferring an accusation against any person to any of the persons who have lawful authority over that person, would not amount to defamation. In the instant case the petitioner wife made accusation against the opposite party before his superior in office in good faith and consistent to her accusation made in the petition of complaint. Therefore, the same would not amount to any defamation as the same is excepted in the 8th exception."
Case Title: Ram Sevak Lohar v. State
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 92
While opining that the sole evidence of a victim of sexual assault is enough to secure a conviction, the Calcutta High Court on Friday observed that the evidence of a victim need not be tested with the same amount of suspicion as that of an accomplice. A Bench comprising Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Kesang Doma Bhutia observed that the Supreme Court in various decisions have held that barring serious exceptions, the evidence of victim of sexual assault is enough for conviction. Opining that the evidence of a victim of sexual assault need not be tested with the same amount of suspicion as that of an accomplice, the Court underscored, "A girl, who is the victim of sexual assault, is not an accomplice to the crime but is a victim of another person's lust and, therefore, her evidence need not be tested with the same amount of suspicion as that of an accomplice. Maintaining that the sole and trust worthy evidence of a woman, who is a victim of a sexual offence, is enough to find her assailant guilty. An accused guilty for committing of offence of rape, the solitary evidence of the prosecutrix is sufficient, provided the same inspires confidence and appears to be absolutely trustworthy, unblemished and should be of sterling quality." The Court further observed that the testimony of a minor sexual assault victim must be appreciated taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case. It was also noted that even if the mother of the victim turns hostile. the sole evidence of the victim if found reliable can be enough to secure a conviction. "..it has been held rape is not mere physical assault but instead destroys the whole personality of the victim. The rapist degrades the very soul of the helpless female and therefore, the testimony of the prosecutrix must be appreciated on the background of the entire case, even if the mother turns hostile", the Court observed further.
Case Title: Dr. Kausik Paul v. Seacom Skills University and Others
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 93
The Calcutta High Court has recently observed that the perceived unfairness of a 'hire and fire policy' or a clause of summary dismissal is substantially diluted if an employee is given sufficient opportunity to respond to the charges levelled. Opining that Courts intervene only if the principles of natural justice is found to have been violated, Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya observed, "The perceived unfairness of a "hire and fire" policy or a clause of summary dismissal is substantially diluted where sufficient notice is given to the employee to respond to the charges made against the employee. Courts usually intervene and rectify a situation where a clear breach of the rules of natural justice is established on fact or where the notice of termination is opaque and indecipherable in failing to disclose reasons for the sudden dismissal." The Court further opined that in several sectors, such conditions of summary dismissal may be necessary for maintaining disciplinary standards and also for ensuring the competence levels of employees. "The words "hire and fire" carry a sense of an inherent and abrupt injustice. The underlying imputation is one of summary dismissal without an opportunity of a meaningful say in the decision of dismissal. There are also several sectors where the persons are employed under the condition of a summary dismissal on the happening of certain events. In other spheres, these conditions may be seen as necessary for maintaining disciplinary standards and the competence levels of employees", the Court opined further.
Important Developments
Case Title: Biplab Kumar Chowdhury v. Union of India and Ors
The Calcutta High Court sought response from the Union of India as well as the State government in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition seeking a probe 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. The counsel appearing for the petitioner apprised a Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajrashi Bharadwaj that whenever the Chief Minister flies out of the State, there is some or the other problem faced by her aircraft thereby jeopardising her health and security. The Bench was further informed that on March 4, the aircraft in which the Chief Minister was travelling had dipped close to 8,000 ft. in a matter of seconds causing serious injuries to the Chief Minister. Taking cognizance of the grievance raised, the Court directed the Union of India as well as the State government to obtain instructions in the matter and accordingly listed the matter for further hearing on April 25. The petitioner was also directed to serve a copy of the petitioner to the Advocate General.
Case Title: Suvendu Adhikari v. Hon'ble Speaker, WB Legislative Assembly and Ors and other connected matters
The Calcutta High Court took on record the affidavits-in-opposition filed by West Bengal Legislative Assembly Speaker Biman Banerjee, TMC MLA Mukul Roy and the Secretary, West Bengal Legislative Assembly in a writ petition filed by West Bengal Leader of Opposition Suvendu Adhikari challenging the West Bengal Speaker's decision to reject the petition seeking disqualification of Mukul Roy for defection from BJP to TMC. The counsel appearing for the petitioner prayed before a Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj to grant 2 days extension of time to file the reply to the affidavits-in-opposition. Furthermore, the Bench recorded in the order that the Supreme Court vide order dated February 25, 2022 had directed the High Court to decide the matter within a month after refusing to entrain a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by Adhikari against the Speaker's decision. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Speaker, WB Legislative Assembly it has been averred that the instant petition is not maintainable due to the bar imposed under Article 212 of the Constitution which immunises proceedings inside the Legislature from being challenged in a Court of law on the ground of irregularity of procedure. Furthermore, it has been stipulated that pursuant to Article 212(2) of the Constitution, even an erroneous decision or interpretation of the Rules of procedure by Officers including the Speaker and members cannot be made the subject-matter of scrutiny in a Court of law. "The High Court cannot be a court of revision against the Legislature or the Speaker's ruling with respect to proceedings within the House", it was averred further.
Case Title: Soumen Halder v. The State Of West Bengal & ors
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Calcutta High Court against the decision of the West Bengal government to introduce blue-and-white coloured uniforms for students in all State-run schools which will also feature the 'Biswa Bangla' logo. According to a notification dated March 16 issued by the Paschim Banga Samagra Siksha Mission, students of all government, semi-government and government-aided schools in Bengal will have a common uniform in a blue and white colour scheme which will also feature the Bengal government's 'Biswa Bangla' logo. The 'Biswa Bangla' campaign was launched to promote the sale of traditional Bengali handicrafts and textiles and it was adopted as the State logo in January 2018. The PIL filed by advocate Rajneel Mukherjee seeks an interim stay of such a notification and furthers avers that encryption of logos in the uniforms of students is a 'political stunt' by the TMC-led government. The PIL also questions the basis for introduction of such a uniform by contending that Biswa Bangla is a MSME initiative to promote the handicrafts, textile and clothing work of Bengal and hence the imposition of the Biswa Bangla logo on uniforms of students in government run institutions is unjustified.
4. Calcutta High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognisance Of Birbhum Massacre, Hearing At 2pm Today
The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday took suo moto cognisance of the incident of Rampurhat violence that erupted in the Birbhum district in the State of West Bengal. Shortly after the alleged murder of a Trinamool Congress deputy panchayat chief at Bogtui village in Birbhum district, violence broke out in Rampurhat A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj on Wednesday agreed to take suo moto cognisance of the matter and further averred that the Bench would hear the matter at 2pm today i.e. on March 23. Meanwhile, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition was also filed on Tuesday seeking an investigation by either the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or the National Investigation Agency (NIA) into the incident of Rampurhat violence. The PIL filed by advocate Anindya Kumar Das seeks a probe by either the CBI or the NIA by averring that a 'serious law and order problem' has been created at Rampurhat and that public at large is lying at the mercy of local goons as the State police authorities have failed to abate the ongoing violence.
Case Title: Soumendu Adhikari v. State of West Bengal
The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Wednesday declined to conduct the forensic audit of CCTV cameras used during the recently concluded Contai Municipality elections through some independent agency. The Court was adjudicating upon a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition moved by BJP leader Soumendu Adhikari alleging that large scale violence and rigging of votes had taken place in the recently concluded Contai Municipality elections. Elections to 108 municipalities in the State including the Contai municipality took place on February 27. The counsel for the ECI submitted before the Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj a communication sent by the Under Secretary of the ECI stipulating that the ECI has no prior experience in conducting such forensic audit of CCTV camera which is stated to be a specialised function. Furthermore, the ECI placed reliance on the Supreme Court judgment in State of Goa v. Fouziya Imtiaz Shaikh to contend that it is the sole responsibility of the State Election Commission (SEC) to supervise and conduct elections by carrying out its Constitutional mandate. It was further averred that the SEC has also been given the responsibility to fill in the gaps when there is no existing law or Rules governing a matter pertaining to the conduct of elections. Thus, the ECI declined the request to conduct a forensic audit of the CCTV footage through an independent agency.
Case Title: The Court on its own Motion In re: The Brutal Incident of Bogtui Village, Rampurhat, Birbhum
The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday, while adjudicating upon the suo moto petition related to the the incident of Rampurhat violence in Birbhum district directed the State government to immediately install CCTV cameras with adequate storage facilities covering all angles of the scene of the crime in the presence of the District Judge, Purba Bhurdawan. The Court further directed the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) to visit the the scene of the crime and collect necessary evidence for forensic examination without any delay. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj on Wednesday observed that the suo moto petition has been registered to ensure that fair investigation takes place and those who are responsible for the incident are traced out and adequately punished by following due process of law. Declining the prayer for a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Court observed that an opportunity should first be granted to the State investigating authorities to produce the case diary and other relevant documents before the Court by 2pm tomorrow i.e. on March 24. "We at the first instance give an opportunity to the State to produce the case diary/ report about the investigation by tomorrow 2 PM. Report relating to investigation done until now to be produced by 2 PM on 24 March," the Court directed. Extending police protection to the vulnerable witnesses, the Court further directed, "Director General of Police and Inspector General of Police in consultation with District Judge, Purba Bardhaman district should ensure that witnesses are adequately protected and not threatened or influenced by anyone".
Case Title: Anindya Sundar Das v. Union of India and other connected matters
The Calcutta High Court on Thursday allowed the impleadment of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and the State Human Rights Commission in order to constitute a two-member Committee to address the grievances of alleged victims of violence that had taken place post the declaration of the West Bengal assembly elections in May 2021. The Court vide order dated August 19, 2021 had handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) the investigation of cases related to murder, rape and crime against women whereas a Special Investigation Team (SIT) had been constituted to investigate other criminal cases related to post-poll violence. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajrashi Bharadwaj on the last date of hearing had taken on record a detailed affidavit filed by advocate Priyanka Tibrewal, petitioner appearing in person, wherein the names and contact details of 303 alleged victims of post-poll violence had been enumerated. She had further prayed before the Bench to constitute a committee of two Members, one from the NHRC and the State Human Rights Commission so that further affidavits and complaints can be placed before them and the real position can be ascertained by the constituted Committee. On Thursday, the Court allowed the petitioner to implead both the NHRC and the State Human Rights Commission in the instant proceedings. Accordingly, the petitioner was directed to implead the NHRC and the State Human Rights Commission within 2 days.