SC pulls up CBI for allegations against WB judiciary in post-poll violence cases

The Supreme Court on Friday admonished the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for making sweeping allegations against the West Bengal judiciary, refusing to entertain the agency’s plea seeking the transfer of 45 post-poll violence cases outside the state in view of a slew of “scandalous” statements in the CBI’s petition.
Reprimanding CBI for “tarnishing” the image of the entire state judiciary, a bench of justices AS Oka and Pankaj Mithal took strong exception to the CBI’s allegations, characterising them as serious and unfounded aspersions.
“There’s a blanket averment in your petition that judges are wrongly granting bail. You are branding all courts as hostile and biased. These are aspersions against the judges there. It cannot be accepted,” the bench told additional solicitor general SV Raju, who represented CBI in the matter.
CBI, which took over the investigation into post-poll violence cases on the orders of the Calcutta high court, moved the Supreme Court last year seeking to shift the trials outside West Bengal. The agency argued in its petition that the environment in the state was “hostile” and that it had “justifiable and reasonable apprehension” about the possibility of free and fair trials. On February 14, a single-judge bench stayed trial in the cases while issuing notices in the matter.
However, on Friday, the bench rejected the CBI’s blanket allegations of bias and hostility, emphasising the gravity of the CBI’s claims while adding that the agency’s officers might hold personal biases against certain states but should not extend these biases to the judiciary.
Underscoring that casting aspersions against the entire judiciary without specific grounds was unacceptable, the bench warned of potential contempt proceedings. “This is a fit case to issue contempt against the person who certified this petition,” it told the ASG.
While Raju blamed “loose drafting” as the reason why such statements became part of the agency’s petition, the court was unconvinced, directing that the CBI’s allegations were serious enough to warrant withdrawal.
Highlighting the inability of district judges to defend themselves in such a forum, the bench added: “Judges can’t defend themselves, but we can’t allow you to do that. District court judges can’t come here to defend themselves.”
The bench further expressed concern about the broader implications of the CBI’s request to transfer 45 cases, questioning what would happen to the victims if these cases were moved out of state.
At this point, ASG Raju sought to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh one.
In its order, the bench noted: “Paragraph 3 of the petition contains grounds of transfer where scandalous allegations have been made against all the courts in West Bengal. It has been repeatedly stated in the petition that hostile environment prevails in courts. It’s very unfortunate that a central agency like CBI has made such averments.”
While allowing CBI to withdraw its petition, the court made it clear that all grounds and objections would remain open for consideration.
In its petition, CBI contended that several accused individuals in post-poll violence cases were being granted bail by trial courts without hearing the prosecution, pointing to a specific case from Birbhum district where three accused were released on bail without CBI’s submission. Though the high court later cancelled their bail, CBI cited these instances to argue for transferring the trials outside West Bengal.
According to the agency, complainants, prosecution witnesses, and even counsel for the prosecution were allegedly threatened and manhandled within court premises, pressurising them not to testify truthfully. The agency also highlighted instances where security was reportedly not provided to the complainants and witnesses, putting their lives and property at risk and undermining the fairness of the trials. One such incident occurred on February 11, 2023, when CBI counsel Kaushik Bhadra was allegedly manhandled by advocates and supporters of the Trinamool Congress in Mathabhanga, Cooch Behar, during a court proceeding. Bhadra filed a complaint with the police, but a counter-complaint was also filed against him, further complicating the matter.