Explained: Why a ‘battle of benches’ in Calcutta HC prompted SC to take note – and charge

Intervening in a bitter spat between two benches of the Calcutta High Court, the Supreme Court on Saturday (January 29) transferred to itself a case related to alleged irregularities in medical admissions in West Bengal.

The five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud also stayed all proceedings into the case and directed completion of pleadings in a period of three weeks.

What prompted SC intervention?

The case in question pertains to allegations of irregularities in issuance of caste certificates to MBBS candidates aspiring for admission in reserved category seats in state-run medical colleges and hospitals in West Bengal.

The apex court on Saturday took suo moto cognizance of the matter after a single-judge bench of Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay on Thursday (January 25) defied a stay order passed by a division bench and asked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to immediately start probing the case. Justice Gangopadhyay during his hearing also made strong remarks against Justice Soumen Sen, one of the judges in the Division Bench, accusing him of pandering to the interests of West Bengal's ruling party to overrule his order for a CBI probe.

The feud is a rare occurrence as officially as it is the first time a single-judge bench has refused to acknowledge the authority of a larger bench of the same court, in defiance of well-established laws.

What started the feud?

On Wednesday (January 24), the Single-Judge Bench of Justice Gangopadhyay ordered a CBI inquiry into the fake caste certificate scam case to expose the “larger picture of corruption” in the state. Stressing for a CBI probe into such cases of corruption, he said the state police’s ‘inefficiency’ was proven by its failure to arrest Shiekh Shahjahan (an accused in the PDS scam) following the assault on Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials during a raid at his house in Sandeshkhali on January 5.

Justice Gangopadhyay said even though the petitioner had not asked for a CBI probe in the caste certificate scam, it is necessary for the agency to be roped in. He directed the Advocate General (AG) of the high court to hand over all relevant documents in the case to the CBI. The judge also directed the Registrar General to ask the CBI to send an officer to receive the documents of the case later in the day.

The AG immediately approached the Division Bench of Justices Soumen Sen and Uday Kumar, seeking a stay on the CBI inquiry. Ordering a stay on the CBI probe for two weeks, the division bench said that the court cannot order an investigation by the agency when it has not been requested by the petitioner. The court also said that there was no need to hand over the documents of the case to a CBI officer (who was directed to appear at 2.30 pm on Wednesday).

However, a CBI officer appeared before Justice Gangopadhyay’s court at 2.30 pm and the latter ordered the documents handover to take place. The judge reportedly said that he has not been informed of the plea against his order for a CBI probe in the Division Court.

Single-Judge Bench Vs Division Bench

On Thursday (January 25), the Division Bench said Justice’s Gangopadhayay’s order of handing over the case documents to CBI was void ab initio (invalid) as the larger bench had already stayed the order for the CBI inquiry before that. The Division Bench also rendered null and void any FIR that may have been filed after the file handover to CBI.

The Division Court also noted that the Sandeshkhali attack on ED didn’t have any connection with the decision to hand over the probe to CBI and that there was no proof that the state police failed in their duty to arrest Shahjahan. The court during Thursday’s hearing also extended the stay on the CBI inquiry from two weeks to four.

The court, however, maintained that Justice Gangopadhyay is the correct judge to decide on the writ petition on the case.

Justice Gangopadhyay refuses to comply with stay order

Later in the day, Justice Gangopadhyay in an order took exception to the larger bench’s decisions and specifically targeted Justice Sen, accusing him of being loyal to the ruling party – the Trinamool Congress (TMC).

He refused to recognise the stay on the CBI inquiry imposed by the Division Bench and asked the agency to finish the investigation and submit a report within two months.

In his order, Justice Gangopadhyay quoted Justice Amrita Sinha, who had apparently told him that Justice Sen had specifically instructed her to dismiss two cases involving TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee. Justice Gangopadhyay also claimed that Justice Sinha apprised the Calcutta High Court’s Chief Justice on the matter and the latter conveyed it to the Chief Justice of India.

In his order, Justice Gangopadhyay also alleged that Justice Sen had people saving him from his transfer to the Orissa High Court in 2021.

What Supreme Court said on the spat?

The raging issue was enough for the Supreme Court to take note and charge at once. The apex court has now stayed all proceedings handled by both the high court benches in the case.

“We will list the pleas exactly after three weeks,” the bench also comprising justices Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose said on Saturday.

“We will stay further proceedings. We are issuing notice to the State of West Bengal and the original petitioner before the high court. We will list the proceedings on Monday again. We will stay all further proceedings in the writ petition and the Letters Patent Appeal and the implementation of the single bench order referring the investigation to CBI," the special bench said.

During the hearing, advocate Kapil Sibal, who represented the West Bengal government, said the state has filed a compilation of documents showing the single-bench judge attending public meetings and rallies.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represented the CBI, submitted that the order of the Division Bench lacked jurisdiction as it had stayed Justice Gangopadhyay’s order without filing an appeal memo.

The CJI urged the lawyers including Abhishek Banejeer’s counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi from casting aspersions on the judges.

Reports said the West Bengal government has also filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court challenging the single-bench order for a CBI inquiry into the case.