Judges, illustrating how to maintain integrity and concentrate on the primary goal of delivering justice.
Recently, the Calcutta High Court Justice Soumen Sen made a significant decision to step aside from a contentious primary school case, underscoring the complexities and ethical dilemmas faced by the judiciary. This move came during a hearing before the division bench comprising Chief Justice Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, where the spotlight turned to Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay and his judicial conduct.
ALSO READ: https://lawchakra.in/amu-supreme-court-day-6/
Advocate Kalyan Bandyopadhyay, representing a section of the petitioners and a member of the Calcutta High Court’s Legal Aid Committee, sought to bring an issue concerning Justice Gangopadhyay to the forefront. During the hearing, Advocate Bandyopadhyay expressed his desire to discuss matters related to Justice Gangopadhyay, stating, “I want to say something about Justice Gangopadhyay.”
However, Justice Sen, demonstrating his commitment to judicial propriety and restraint, declined to entertain these remarks.
He firmly stated,
“I won’t say anything about this. Enough has happened. This court has been insulted. Everyone has the right to speak in the media. It’s the duty of the judge to direct. I won’t say anything about this.”
ALSO READ: https://lawchakra.in/punjab-haryana-high-court-chandigarh-mayor-bjp-aap/
Justice Sen’s response was not just a refusal to engage in the controversy but also a reflection of his dedication to maintaining the dignity of the court. He further emphasized his impartial stance by saying, “I don’t have any special interest in any case. I have nothing to say about the matter. So please don’t say anything about it.” This statement highlighted his commitment to neutrality and the principles of justice, irrespective of the case or the parties involved.
In a gesture of professional respect, Justice Sen also commented on his relationship with Justice Gangopadhyay,noting,
“I have respect for that judge. I have respect for everyone.”
This remark was significant, considering the backdrop of the ongoing conflict between the two judges.
The root of the issue involving Justice Gangopadhyay stemmed from an order he issued on January 24. In this order, Justice Gangopadhyay directed a CBI investigation into allegations of fake caste certificates being used for admissions in medical colleges in West Bengal. However, the case took a turn when it was referred back to the division bench, and Justice Sen dismissed the FIR associated with this investigation.
ALSO READ: https://lawchakra.in/death-kerala-court-ranjith-sreenivas-murder/
The conflict between Justices Sen and Gangopadhyay escalated when Justice Gangopadhyay openly questioned the division bench’s order, leading to multiple allegations against Justice Sen. He was accused of influencing the investigation for personal gain, and Justice Gangopadhyay pointed out what he perceived as an ‘error‘ in the division bench’s order. Furthermore, Justice Gangopadhyay raised several grievances against Justice Sen, intensifying the dispute.
This ongoing judicial dispute eventually caught the attention of the Supreme Court. On January 27, in an unprecedented move, a special bench of five judges at the Supreme Court intervened, staying all proceedings pending before the Calcutta High Court related to this matter. This included the CBI investigation directive issued by Justice Gangopadhyay, marking a significant moment in the Indian judiciary’s efforts to resolve internal conflicts.
The situation at the Calcutta High Court, marked by Justice Soumen Sen’s decision to step aside and his statements of neutrality and respect, highlights the intricate challenges faced by the judiciary. It underscores the importance of judicial restraint, ethical conduct, and the preservation of the court’s dignity. As the legal fraternity and the public continue to observe these developments, the actions and words of Justice Sen serve as a reminder of the delicate balance judges must maintain in upholding justice and fairness.
