Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up: August 6 - August 13

NOMINAL INDEX

1. Hira Bittar v The State of West Bengal 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 214
2. Senjuti Chakrabarti Vs Learned Registrar General High Court At Calcutta And Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 215
3. Union Of India And Anr. v Rashmi Metaliks Limited 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 216
4. Bithika Sil v. Kartick Paik & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 217
5. Swapan Manna v The State of West Bengal & ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 218
6. Pooja Mehta & Ors. vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 219
7. Sri Shubhendu Kumar Goswami & Ors. Versus The State Of West Bengal & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 220
8. Mritunjoy Poria & Ors. Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 221

Case: Hira Bittar v The State of West Bengal

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 214

The Calcutta High Court recently allowed the appeal preferred by a husband against trial court order convicting him for alleged offences of mental and physical cruelty allegedly inflicted upon his spouse/ complainant.

A Single-bench of Justice Shampa (Dutt) Paul held:

Though this witness has stated that she was assaulted by the appellant and his family members and suffered bleeding injuries, there are no medical papers nor any injury report on record. The question of mental cruelty has to be considered in the light of the norms of marital ties of the particular society to which the parties belong, their social values, status, and the environment in which they live. The conduct of the concerned party should be grave and substantial and it must be much more serious than the ordinary wear and tear of daily life. Mental cruelty is a state of mind - The feeling of deep anguish, disappointment, or frustration in one spouse caused by the conduct of the other over a long period of time may lead to mental cruelty. And such feeling and intensity are felt differently by each person. Some are stronger in mind than others. In the present case there is absolutely no evidence/proof on record of any physical cruelty.

2. “Absolutely Premature”: Calcutta High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Strict Implementation Of PoSH Act Within The High Court

Case: Senjuti Chakrabarti Vs Learned Registrar General High Court At Calcutta And Ors

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 215

The Calcutta High Court on Monday dismissed a PIL filed by a practising advocate for the “strict implementation” of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (“PoSH Act”) within the Calcutta High Court.

Petitioner claimed that various RTIs filed by him revealed that the PoSH Act had not been complied with in its entirety.

In noting that such an issue could not be examined in a PIL, and highlighting the presence of a robustly functioning committee dealing with PoSH complaints arising at the Calcutta High Court, a division bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya remarked:

A writ of mandamus can only be issued when there has been inaction by authorities, or a genuine representation is not acted on in accordance with law. The petitioner has not made any such representation and it appears that the writ petition is founded on replies obtained under the RTI Act. Therefore, we find that the writ petition is absolutely premature and cannot be entertained. However, it shall be open to the petitioner to make appropriate representation before the concerned forum.

3. ‘Fraudulent’ Conduct Of Railways Has Shocked Our Conscience: Calcutta HC Unconditionally Stays Arbitral Award, Directs Probe By Union Govt

Case: Union Of India And Anr. v Rashmi Metaliks Limited

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 216

The Calcutta High Court today unconditionally stayed an award granted in favour of the South Eastern Railways (“SER”) under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”) on grounds of fraud and corruption perpetrated by collusion between the parties in obtaining the impugned award.

In expressing his dismay and directing an investigation into the matter by a high-level committee of the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, a single-bench of Justice Shekhar B Saraf held:

The Court cannot overlook fraud being perpetuated in the making of the award by way of collusion between the parties. Furthermore, I hereby also direct the Ministry of Finance, Union of India to immediately constitute a multi-member high-level enquiry committee headed by a Secretary to the Government of India level rank officer to holistically inquire into the shocking conduct of the Railways and its officials (both serving and retired) and the other stakeholders in the aforementioned matter. The Committee shall be at liberty to take assistance of central investigation agencies as it may deem fit. The Committee is further requested to complete the enquiry and submit a report before this Court within three months from the date of this order.

4. [Grievous Hurt] Calcutta High Court Criticises Trial Court For Relying Solely On Party's Submissions, Not Calling For Injury Report

Case: Bithika Sil v. Kartick Paik & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 217

The Calcutta High Court recently took exception to a Sessions Court order solely relying on prosecutor's failure to raise objections to grant of bail to accused in a case of grievous hurt and rejecting the complainant's plea for cancellation of bail, without calling for an injury report.

A single bench of Justice Shampa (Dutt) Paul held:

It is unfortunate that considering the nature of offences alleged, the Court relied upon the submission of the APP, without calling for the injury report. It is the duty of the Court to ensure justice and not rely totally on the submission of either party. Though at that stage there has been prima facie abuse of the process of law/Court before the Trial Court as discussed, but considering the present circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief prayed for at this stage in the interest of justice.

5. Calcutta High Court Allows BJP Functionary To Hold Rally On World Tribal Day, Issues Directions To Avoid Clash With TMC Rally

Case: Swapan Manna v The State of West Bengal & ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 218

The Calcutta High Court has allowed a plea filed by a functionary of the Bharatiya Janata Party (“BJP”) seeking permission to hold a rally and meeting on the 9^th of August (today) at the Pingbone Nabkung Ground (Math) in Paschim Medinipur, on the occasion of World Tribal Day.

It also issued directions to avoid any clashes with another rally to be held on behalf of Trinamool Congress (“TMC”) in the nearby area.

A single-bench of Justice Jay Sengupta ordered:

Let the petitioner hold his meeting at the venue that was selected for it from 9 a.m. to 1.30 a.m. at the Pingboni Nabakung Ground. The said area shall be carefully manned by police personnel from the local police station who shall ensure that no breach of peace takes place. The petitioner shall abide by the conditions for hold such meeting. They shall name three persons responsible for compliance of all terms and conditions to hold the meeting. The meeting shall not cause any obstruction to the public at large. The sound volume stipulations should also be scrupulously maintained. After the meeting is over, the venue of the meeting shall be cleaned up by the petitioner’s men and agents. The police authorities shall make necessary arrangements to ensure that no breach of peace takes place.

6. Dhulagarh Riots Coverage| Calcutta HC Quashes Case Against Journalists Sudhir Chaudhary, Pooja Mehta For Allegedly 'Promoting Enmity'

Case: Pooja Mehta & Ors. vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 219

The Calcutta High Court last week QUASHED a case against Former Zee News Editor (presently Consulting Editor, Aaj Tak) Sudhir Chaudhary, Zee News Journalist Pooja Mehta and cameraperson Tanmay Mukherjee under Section 153A IPC for allegedly 'promoting enmity' during their coverage on 2016 Dhulagarh Riots.

The bench of Justice Bibhas Ranjan De observed that the prosecution could not produce any material before the Court which would attract any offence under Section 153A of the IPC and hence, further proceeding with the case would result in an "abuse of process of court" and "will not serve the ends of justice.”

7. Blame-Game Between Govt Authorities Highly Deprecated’: Calcutta HC Directs Accountant-General To Refund Amount Deposited By Litigant In 2004

Case: Sri Shubhendu Kumar Goswami & Ors. Versus The State Of West Bengal & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 220

The Calcutta High Court today directed the West Bengal's Accountant General to refund an amount of Rs 66,000 to a litigant who was made to deposit the said amount in relation to a civil proceeding back in 2004.

In rebuking the “procrastination on behalf of the authorities” in refunding the petitioners deposit even after the case had been settled out-of-court in 2008, a single-bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held:

The facts before me present a rather unfortunate scenario wherein the petitioners have had to vie with pain for the refund of the deposit they made in court. As per my order dated July 11, 2023, another report was filed by the District Judge, Paschim Medinipur on July 26, 2023, which further surfaces the rather sorry state of affairs that have unravelled. There appears to be no contestation to the fact that the petitioners deposited the said amount, nor to their right to get a refund of the same.

The procrastination on behalf of the authorities is clearly without any logical reasoning and simpliciter a lackadaisical attitude on the part of the authorities.

8. Panchayat Elections: Calcutta High Court Provides Police Protection To Victorious BJP Candidates For Panchayat Board Formation

Case: Mritunjoy Poria & Ors. Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 221

Ahead of the formation of ‘panchayat boards’ pursuant to the declaration of results in the West Bengal Panchayat Elections 2023, the Calcutta High Court has issued a spathe of directions for police protection to the winning candidates during the process to be held on the 11^th August.

One such petition was filed by victorious candidates belonging to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), from the district of Paschim Mednipur apprehending violence by “miscreants belonging to the ruling dispensation.”

In allowing the prayer for police protection as sought in the writ petition, a single-bench of Justice Jay Sengupta held:

“It appears that on the basis of the petitioners’ complaint some steps have been taken. The petitioners are the winning candidates of Bandipur – I Gram Panchayet. The board formation process would take place at the Bandipur – I Gram Panchayet office on August 11, 2023 at 11.00 A.M. It further appears that the petitioners apprehend that the local miscreants may not allow the petitioner to participate in the said meeting. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, let the petitioners report to the Officer-in-Charge, Chandrakona Police Station on August 11, 2023 at 09.00 A.M. so that the Officer-in-Charge can make adequate police arrangement to escort them to the venue for participating in the process of board formation. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition being WPA No. 19216 of 2023 is disposed of.”

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

1. Three Undertrial Prisoners Kept Together In Single Cell Move Calcutta High Court Alleging 'Solitary Confinement'

Case: Bishal Das & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors

The Calcutta High Court heard a plea alleging that prolonged placement of three under-trial prisoners in a single prison is inhumane an amounts to 'solitary confinement'.

In recording the State’s report on the various issues flagged by the petitioners, including inter alia the lack of medical facilities, non-compliance with Supreme Court guidelines on under-trial prisoners, etc., a single-bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya allowed the petitioners liberty to file an exception to the State’s report, and ordered:

As such, since the petitioners seek to apprise themselves on the contents of the report filed today by the State, and to take an exception thereto, if necessary, the matter is adjourned. The report filed by the State today be kept on record. The exception to the report, if any, shall be filed by the petitioners on the next returnable date, with an advance copy of the same to learned counsel appearing for the State.

2. Supreme Court Collegium Recommends Transfer Of Three Calcutta High Court Judges

The Supreme Court Collegium, in its meeting held on 3 August 2023, has recommended the transfer of 3 Calcutta High Court judges.

The Collegium, consisting of Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice B R Gavai and Justice Surya Kant, has recommended the names of the following 3 judges of the Calcutta High Court:

Justice Shekhar B. Saraf (Proposed to be transferred to Allahabad High Court)

Justice Lapita Banerji (Proposed to be transferred to Punjab and Haryana High Court)

Justice Bibek Chaudhuri (Proposed to be transferred to Patna High Court)

Significantly, the Collegium has also proposed to transfer the following 2 judges to the Calcutta High Court

Justice Madhuresh Prasad (from Patna High Court)

Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani (from Allahabad High Court)