The Supreme Court has strongly rebuked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for its assertion that courts in West Bengal are “hostile.” The court’s reaction follows CBI’s complaint regarding perceived hostility in the state’s judiciary, which the court deemed as casting aspersions on the entire judicial system, potentially amounting to contempt, reports Amit Anand Choudhary.
The CBI had used this claim to seek the transfer of trials related to 42 cases of post-assembly election violence across 15 districts in West Bengal to another state.
SC Responds: ‘You’re Casting Aspersions on the Judiciary’
A bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal expressed strong disapproval of the CBI’s blanket statements, indicating that such assertions could lead to contempt proceedings against the officials responsible for the petition. The CBI contended that accused individuals in these post-poll violence cases were being granted bail without proper hearings.
“What grounds have you taken? You are branding all courts as hostile. Blanket claims that bail is granted without hearing you are an affront to the judiciary,” the bench remarked to Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju.
While the ASG clarified that the concerns were about external hostility rather than in-court matters and acknowledged the loose drafting of the petition, he insisted that transferring the trials outside West Bengal was necessary for fair proceedings. The bench countered that making such a transfer would imply an acknowledgment of a hostile environment within the entire state judiciary.
“If we transfer these cases, we are essentially certifying that all the courts in the state are not functioning properly. Your officers may disagree with certain judicial officers, but to claim that the entire judiciary is ineffective is unacceptable,” the bench stated.
The court permitted the CBI to withdraw its petition while expressing its discontent with the allegations made. “Scandalous claims have been made against all courts in West Bengal. It’s unfortunate that a central agency has chosen to cast such aspersions. Although the ASG claims there was no intent to offend, the statements suggest otherwise. We allow the withdrawal of the petition, but all objections to the proposed transfer remain open,” the bench concluded.
