Apex Court Seeks Report from West Bengal CID After Plea Alleges Meddling by Calcutta High Court Judge & Spouse in Criminal Investigation.
(Judicial Quest News Network)
In an unprecedented case the Apex court has directed the West Bengal’s CID department to continue its investigation without capitulating to any pressure in connection with a plea of a 64-year-old widow and her daughter alleging interference in a criminal probe by a Lawyer-husband of a Calcutta High Court judge Justice Amrita Sinha.
It is submitted that Advocate Pratap Chandra Dey and his wife Justice Amrita Sinha have misused their position by interfering into two criminal the criminal cases filed by the petitioners against their relatives.
It is a pure civil dispute pertaining to ancestral property after the demise of the father of Petitioners who are siblings, quickly took a turn to worse where the interference by Respondent a practicing advocate and allegedly legal consultant of other Respondent, started threatening the Petitioners and the investigating agencies on account of his spousal status, being the husband of a sitting Judge of the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and syn Bhatti was hearing this criminal writ petition alleging that the Lawyer husband of the sitting high court judge as well as the judge herself has been interfering in the case and influencing police to shield an accused in the criminal case emerging out of a family dispute.
The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde, who was assisted by Advocate-on-Record Mithu Jain.
The Petitioner Banu Roi Chaudhry, and her daughter, have raised serious concerns about the physical and mental abuse they have endured at the hands of the respondents.
what has further shocked the conscience of the Petitioners and made them lose trust in the entire legal process is the active participation of Respondent No. 10, and further illegal interference by Judge X, who is misusing the position she occupies as a sitting judge of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court.
The petitioners have accused the High Court Judge of misusing her powers to thwart due process and to bring a standstill the investigation
The constant interference by Respondent No. 10 who is an
officer of the court in his capacity as an advocate and his wife, a
sitting judge of a Constitutional Court in the Country, who is vested with the powers to impart justice but is misusing the powers for her personal interest and at the behest of her husband/Respondent No. 10 herein, with the sole intent to cause prejudice to the Petitioners herein and thwart due process and to bring to a standstill the investigation into the following Two FIRs registered at the instance of the Petitioners herein.
It is also alleged that the investigation officer was summoned to Justice Sinha’s chambers in the High Court premises, where he was reprimanded and instructed to drop the investigation as being purely civil in nature, the petitioner have further alleged calling this a direct interference with an ongoing investigation of a case by employing extra- Constitutional measures.
This is even more glaring considering the fact that there was no lis/proceeding pending before the Hon’ble Judge with regard to the dispute at hand, and neither did the Hon’ble Judge have the roster or determination of such criminal matters, and her conduct does not by any stretch of imagination pertains to her discharging her judicial functions.
soon after the Investigating
Officer was summoned by the Hon’ble Judge to her chambers, the Respondent No. 8, was released on bail after a mere two (2) day custody, without any objections from the Investigating agency, despite the officials of the police themselves being a witness to the beatings meted out to the Petitioners herein by Respondent No. 8, while they stood as mute spectators.
The Official Respondents, in either collusion and connivance with the perpetrators or under illegal diktats of the Respondent No. 10 and his wife/Judge X, have shown complete apathy to the cause and concerns of the Petitioners herein, which has led to the Petitioners fearing for their life and property.
The petitioners have called for a fair investigation into the FIRs without any external interference and stressed the need for the court’s intervention to ensure justice is served.
The matter is now posted for December this year.
