You Are Not Above Law, What Is Troubling You? Whether You Are Involved Or Not, Let Probe Agency Decide: Calcutta High Court To Abhishek Banerjee

The Calcutta High Court on Monday pulled up TMC leader Abhishek Banerjee for seeking an opportunity of being heard in response to the CBI investigation earlier ordered by the court against him in West Bengal Teacher Recruitment Scam case.

The single judge bench of Justice Amrita Sinha said:

“How are you aggrieved? What is your apprehension? What is the difficulty, an investigation? Nobody is above an investigation? Why are you aggrieved? If an investigation is done, you co-operate with the investigation? What is troubling you? Whether you are involved or not, let the investigating authority take a decision.”

The case was earlier being heard by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay who had ordered central agencies to investigate Banerjee's role in the alleged scam. The Supreme Court on April 28 had directed the Acting Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court to reassign the matter to another judge.

Advocate Sabyasachi Banerjee, appearing for Banerjee,  contended that he has not been made a party yet. He further argued that no notice was served to him.

“I should be heard, before an order is passed,” argued Advocate Banerjee before the bench of Justice Sinha.

The bench observed that during investigation, the names of many persons can come up.

"Is it that everybody has to be given a notice prior to that? Participate, you co-operate with the investigation, whatever comes. You are no body above the law. The law is the Supreme thing," said the court, adding,  “Nothing is against you, I do not see anything against you”. 

“Make me a party and hear me, that is all I am saying,” prayed Advocate Banerjee.

“Whether you have to right to be heard before the investigation is done? So many persons involved in an investigation, do you think everybody is required to be given a notice prior hand?” asked Justice Sinha.

“If compliance is sought and I am a necessary party, I should be heard,” submitted Advocate Banerjee.

“It is you who think you are the necessary part. You are becoming extra-apprehensive.” remarked Justice Sinha.

“My apprehensions were such that it took a transfer,” submitted Advocate Banerjee.

“Again you are mistaken, the ground for transfer is not here,” said Justice Sinha.

“Why did not you come up with an application, the Court could have dealt with it,” remarked Justice Sinha.

“Kindly give us two days time, we will file an application,” submitted Advocate Banerjee.

The bench said had Banerjee been so interested to put forward his submission before the court, he ought to have been present with an application.

"The same is not on record. Leave has been sought to file the same. Be it recorded that the Hon’ble judge who was hearing the matter passed direction for investigation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court was pleased not to pass any stay on the said order. As a prayer has been made to afford an opportunity of hearing, for ends of justice the matter stands adjourned till May 12," said the court.

The bench further reserved its decision on the revision application moved by the State against the order of transferring the probe to CBI and ED.