The Supreme Court on Friday strongly reprimanded the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for its sweeping allegations against the judiciary of West Bengal. The top court refused to entertain the CBI’s plea seeking to transfer 45 post-poll violence cases outside the state, citing “scandalous” statements made in the agency’s petition.
A bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Pankaj Mithal expressed strong disapproval of the CBI’s claims, which painted the entire West Bengal judiciary as biased. The court emphasized that such serious allegations against the judiciary must be backed by evidence, warning that unsubstantiated claims could damage the credibility of the justice system.
“Tarnishing the Judiciary’s Image Is Unacceptable,” Says Supreme Court
“You are branding all courts as hostile and biased,” remarked the bench, adding that these aspersions were grave and unfounded. Justice Oka noted, “There’s a blanket averment in your petition that judges are wrongly granting bail. These are aspersions against the judges there. It cannot be accepted.” The court made it clear that such generalizations against the judiciary are deeply concerning and cannot be allowed.
Also Read: What is One Nation-One Election? Benefits, Challenges And Everything You Need To Know
The CBI had filed a petition seeking to transfer trials in post-poll violence cases outside West Bengal, citing a “hostile” environment and concerns about the fairness of the proceedings. The agency claimed it had a “justifiable and reasonable apprehension” about the possibility of conducting free and fair trials in the state.
Supreme Court Rejects Bias Allegations
On Friday, the court firmly rejected the CBI’s allegations, criticizing the agency for extending personal biases to the judiciary without any specific grounds. The bench underscored the gravity of the claims made in the petition and warned of possible contempt proceedings against those responsible for drafting the petition.
“This is a fit case to issue contempt against the person who certified this petition,” stated the bench, raising the issue of accountability within the CBI. While Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, representing the CBI, blamed “loose drafting” for the inclusion of such statements in the petition, the court remained unconvinced and directed the agency to withdraw its allegations.
District Judges Defenseless Against CBI’s Claims
The court further pointed out that district judges, who were at the heart of the CBI’s claims, were defenseless against such accusations. “Judges can’t defend themselves, but we can’t allow you to do that. District court judges can’t come here to defend themselves,” said the bench, emphasizing the need for judicial dignity and fairness in public discourse.
Concerns Over Transfer of 45 Cases
Another key concern raised by the Supreme Court was the potential impact on victims if the trials were moved out of West Bengal. The court questioned what would happen to the victims and their cases if the trials were transferred to another state, suggesting that the move could have far-reaching consequences for those seeking justice.
In response, ASG Raju sought to withdraw the petition, with the liberty to file a fresh one, should the need arise.
CBI’s Allegations Criticized in Court Order
In its final order, the Supreme Court highlighted the problematic nature of the CBI’s petition, specifically pointing to paragraph 3, where “scandalous allegations” were made against the courts in West Bengal. The court stated, “It’s very unfortunate that a central agency like CBI has made such averments.”
Although the court allowed the CBI to withdraw its petition, it noted that all grounds and objections would remain open for consideration in future filings.
CBI’s Concerns Over Fair Trials in West Bengal
In its now-withdrawn petition, the CBI had raised concerns about several accused individuals in post-poll violence cases being granted bail without the prosecution being heard. The agency cited a specific case from Birbhum district, where three accused were released on bail without the CBI’s input, though their bail was later canceled by the High Court.
The CBI also claimed that witnesses and complainants were being threatened and manhandled within court premises, allegedly putting them under pressure not to testify truthfully. The agency highlighted the lack of security provided to these individuals, which, it argued, compromised the fairness of the trials.
Incident of CBI Counsel Being Manhandled
One incident cited by the CBI occurred on February 11, 2023, in Mathabhanga, Cooch Behar, where CBI counsel Kaushik Bhadra was allegedly manhandled by advocates and supporters of the All India Trinamool Congress during a court proceeding. Bhadra’s complaint was followed by a counter-complaint filed against him, further complicating the situation.
Despite these claims, the Supreme Court remained steadfast in its rejection of the CBI’s blanket accusations, urging the agency to present more credible evidence in future petitions.
