'So Many Law Officers, Yet None Present' : Supreme Court Criticises Union's Non-Representation In West Bengal's Suit Over CBI's Powers

In State of West Bengal's suit against the Union over suo motu registration of cases by CBI despite revocation of general consent, the Supreme Court today expressed dismay at non-representation on behalf of the Union, saying it showed that the Union was not interested in an important matter.

The matter was listed before a bench of Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih for framing of issues. Conveying the Court's displeasure, Justice Gavai flagged the non-representation to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (who subsequently appeared in another matter) and said,

"Mr. Solicitor, in that Bengal matter, nobody was present. It [shows] a very sorry picture, that the Union is not interested in important matter. There are so many law officers, so many senior counsels on your panel...not a single lawyer is present?".

Offering no justification, the SG apologized to the Court and conceded that it was a mistake. When Justice Gavai noted, as per Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal's (for State of West Bengal) submission, that the State had shared draft issues from its end in December, 2024 itself, the SG sought time to do the needful on behalf of the Union. At his request, the bench gave the Union 2 weeks' time, as a matter of last opportunity.

To recapitulate, it was in November 2018 that the West Bengal government withdrew general consent allowing CBI to conduct investigation of cases in the state.

In 2021, the present suit was filed by West Bengal government under Article 131 of the Indian Constitution (which deals with the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction in a dispute between the Centre and one or more states), contending that despite revocation of its consent for the central agency under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act of 1946, the CBI was continuing to suo motu register FIRs in respect to offences that took place within the state.

Though the Union raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the suit, in July 2024, the top Court rejected it and held that the state's plaint disclosed a cause of action. The bench also rejected an argument taken by the Union that the state had suppressed material facts in the plaint. Thereafter, the matter was listed for framing of issues.

Appearance: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal alongwith Advocate-on-Record Kunal Mimani (for West Bengal)

Case Title: State of West Bengal v. Union of India | Original Suit No. 4 of 2021