In a recent Supreme Court hearing, the West Bengal government was instructed to persist with its investigation into a criminal case stemming from a family property dispute, without yielding to any external pressures. The plea, brought forward by Bani Roy Choudhury, alleges that Protap Chandra Dey, the spouse of a sitting Calcutta High Court judge, is leveraging his position to influence the police in favor of the accused.
Also read- Calcutta High Court Denies Permission For FIR Against BJP Leader Suvendu Adhikari (lawchakra.in)
During the proceedings, the Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti, was informed by Astha Sharma, the standing counsel for Bengal, of a sealed-cover report previously submitted to the chief justice of the Calcutta High Court. This report, dated September 15, detailed the investigation’s progress and the alleged interference. After reviewing the contents, the bench called for an updated status report in a sealed cover by the next hearing in December.
Senior advocate Sunil Fernandes, also representing the Bengal government, assured the bench of an impartial investigation, now under the purview of the CID. Justice Khanna, addressing Sharma, stated,
“If there is any form of interference in the investigations or at the time of filing the chargesheet, the matter may be brought to the notice of the top court.”
The petitioner’s counsel, senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, highlighted the shift in the nature of the dispute due to the alleged interference by Dey, who is also representing the petitioner’s brother’s family. Hegde informed the court that the FIRs lodged by the petitioner encompassed serious charges, including criminal conspiracy, cheating, and attempt to culpable homicide.
The case took a more troubling turn when the lawyer, due to his marital ties with Justice Sinha, allegedly began to exert undue influence. The petitioners, a sexagenarian widow and her daughter, have accused the high court judge of “misusing her powers” to impede the investigation into the FIRs. The petition states,
“What has further shocked the conscience of the petitioners and made them lose trust in the entire legal process is the active participation of the lawyer-husband, and further illegal interference by the sitting judge, who is misusing the position she occupies.”
The petitioners have also detailed an incident where the investigating officer was summoned to Justice Sinha’s chambers and instructed to dismiss the investigation as purely civil. This act of interference, as alleged, led to the release of one of the respondents on bail without objection from the investigating agency, despite the police being witnesses to the assault on the petitioners.
The petitioners, fearing for their life and property, have implored the Supreme Court for a fair investigation into the FIRs, free from external interference. They have invoked the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32, stating,
“The petitioners having faced systematic harassment at the hands of none other than a sitting judge of the highest constitutional office in the state, and being denied of their right to fair investigation and justice have lost all hope in the state machinery and has therefore invoked the extraordinary remedy guaranteed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.”
The case, Bani Roy Choudhury & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors., has thus brought to the forefront serious concerns regarding the influence of personal relationships on legal proceedings and the imperative need for judicial impartiality.