On Friday(10th May),Supreme Court dismisses case against Pratap Chandra Dey, husband of Calcutta High Court Justice Amrita Sinha, citing political motives in the FIR. After reviewing state counsel’s arguments, the court appears content.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: On Friday(10th May), The Supreme Court has disposed of the case against Pratap Chandra Dey, the husband of Calcutta High Court Justice Amrita Sinha. The court has also made remarks suggesting that the FIR filed in this case had political motives. However, after careful consideration of the arguments put forth by the state counsel, the court seemed satisfied.
The case was heard on Friday by a division bench of the Supreme Court, comprising Justice Sanjeev Khanna and Justice Dipankar Dutta. During the proceedings, Justice Khanna advised the state counsel, “Keep politics out of the FIR.”
Furthermore, the judge raised a question regarding the absence of a caveat filed by the state before the case was initiated. However, the state lawyer later provided a comprehensive explanation, clarifying the matter to the court’s satisfaction.
Advocate Astha Sharma represented the West Bengal government in the Supreme Court. She stated-
“In a property dispute, allegations of inaction were leveled against the State Police. Pratap Chandra Dey, who is both the spouse of Calcutta High Court Judge Amrita Singh and a lawyer, was accused of improperly influencing the case.”
The apex court, during the hearing, observed that the FIR filed by the state police appeared to be politically motivated. Additionally, the judge expressed dissatisfaction with the state’s failure to file a caveat before approaching the Supreme Court. However, the court later concurred with the statement made by the state lawyer, Sunil Fernandez.
Fernandez asserted-
“The state informed the court that they had submitted the advance copy of the case in accordance with the rules before the hearing.”
He further explained that the state police had taken necessary action due to the serious allegations against the High Court judge in the case. Failing to do so would have raised doubts about the police’s role. Following the hearing, the Supreme Court disposed of the case.
The accusations against Justice Singh’s husband involved claims of his illegal interference in a criminal case through abuse of power. Pratap Chandra Dey, a lawyer by profession, became the subject of a CID probe after a 64-year-old widow and her daughter lodged a complaint. However, the Supreme Court later concluded that no further steps could be taken in this case. In December, the court reiterated that the police could take appropriate action in accordance with the law.
What specifically led to the complaint against Justice Sinha’s husband?
The complaint originated from a dispute between a 64-year-old widow and some of her relatives concerning a land issue. The case was filed in court, and the petitioner approached the Supreme Court, alleging that her grandfather and other relatives were attempting to evict her from her father’s house to deprive her of her ancestral property. She claimed to have been subjected to numerous threats. Furthermore, her lawyer informed the court that there was CCTV footage providing evidence of his client being physically assaulted. Consequently, the widow filed two criminal complaints against her relatives.
The widow accused Justice Sinha’s husband, who represented the defendants, of exerting illegal influence on the investigators. Allegedly, he made every effort to impede the progress of the two cases. The Supreme Court directed a thorough investigation into the two criminal complaints, ensuring that the lawyer, as well as his judge wife, would have no influence over the proceedings. Furthermore, the court ordered an investigation into the professional conduct of both the judge and her lawyer husband.
Following the court’s orders, the CID of the state police initiated an investigation into the judge’s husband. He was summoned for questioning on multiple occasions. Interestingly, Justice Singh’s bench had presided over several significant cases related to appointments. The judge had also raised questions regarding the source of income of Abhishek Banerjee, the Trinamool All India General Secretary. In several instances, the judge’s decisions had ruled against the state government.
ALSO READ: Recruitment Scam||Justice Amrita Sinha Reveals Sale of Government Jobs at ‘Cut-Throat’ Prices