The Supreme Court on Friday asked Calcutta High Court’s acting chief justice to “reassign” the teachers’ recruitment controversy from Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay to some “other judge” in view of his alleged remarks against Trinamul MP Abhishek Banerjee in connection with the matter in an interview.
It was not immediately clear whether the directive is to withdraw from Justice Gangopadhyay all the cases relating to the teacher recruitment controversy, or only the case involving Abhishek.
Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, who headed the bench, orally assured solicitor-general Tushar Mehta that he would also take up on the administrative side the alleged instances of some people trying to intimidate Calcutta High Court judges, often with paperweights and slippers.
On April 24, the apex court had said that judges “have no business” granting interviews to the media on pending matters.
It had directed the high court registrar-general to seek a clarification from Justice Gangopadhyay whether he had given an interview to the ABP Ananda news channel on the teachers’ recruitment controversy into which the judge had earlier ordered a CBI probe.
ABP Ananda belongs to a subsidiary of ABP Pvt Ltd, which owns The Telegraph.
On Friday, the bench, which included Justice P.S. Narasimha, issued the order after going through a report submitted by the registrar-general of Calcutta High Court and a note submitted by Justice Gangopadhyay.
“The only reason we are asking for the case to be reassigned to another judge is because of the transcript (of the interview). There is no other reason,” Justice Chandrachud told Mehta.
“They can’t say in the public realm that the judge was biased and such things. But we agree with you that judges should not be browbeaten. As a Chief Justice, if we come across such incidents, we will take it on the administrative side.”
Mehta, appearing along with additional solicitor-general S.V. Raju for the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) that are probing the recruitment controversy, had submitted that judges are frequently targeted in Bengal.
“It is a common practice in the state. Whenever an order goes against certain individuals, the judges are targeted. Before Justice Gangopadhyay, there was another judge (Mehta mentioned no names)…. People went with paperweights and slippers to the judge. Posters were displayed against the judge,” Mehta said.
“This type of conduct sends a demoralising message to the judiciary. Your Lordships should also send a message which should stop such practices, (so) that (it) does not have a demoralising effect on judges. There are people who go to courtrooms and abuse judges. There are videos (of) such incidents.”
The CJI agreed that judges should not be intimidated. “The judges act as per their conscience and the Constitution,” Justice Chandrachud said.
On April 13, the single-judge bench of Justice Gangopadhyay had asked the CBI and the ED to question Abhishek after a Trinamul leader, Kuntal Ghosh, alleged that the central agencies were pressuring him to implicate the MP in the teacher recruitment controversy.
On April 17, the apex court had stayed the order till April 24. It is deemed that the stay would continue till further orders.
When the matter was listed for hearing on April 24, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Abhishek Banerjee, objected to the judge’s interview. The apex court then directed the high court registrar-general to seek a clarification from the judge.
Here are excerpts from Friday’s court order, dictated in open court: “…Paragraph 5 of the affidavit of the (high court) registrar-general states, thus: ‘It is stated that on April 26, 2023, at about 7pm, His Lordship, Hon’ble Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, has been pleased to forward a note prepared by His Lordship in respect of annexure-P7, transcript version of the interview ‘Ghanta-Khanek Songe Suman’ as prepared by the interpreting officer (court) of high court, Calcutta (original side) pursuant to His Lordship’s direction, along with a CD containing the interview which was broadcasted on ABP Ananda, are annexed herewith as Annexure-A, B and C respectively and be treated as a part of this affidavit.’
“We have considered the note prepared by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay in respect of Annexure-P7 and have also perused the transcript of the interview. The transcript has been authenticated on 26 April 2023 by the interpreting officer (court) on the original side of the high court at Calcutta.
“Having considered the transcript, we direct that the acting chief justice of the high court at Calcutta shall reassign the pending proceedings in the case to some other judge of the Calcutta High Court. The judge to whom the proceedings are reassigned by the acting chief justice would be at liberty to take up all applications which may be moved in that regard.”
