West Bengal Bar Council urges CJI to remove Calcutta high court’s acting CJ – Times of India

KOLKATA: The Bar Council of West Bengal has written to the Chief Justice of India, seeking the immediate removal of Calcutta High Court Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal, in order to retain the “majesty and sanctity” of the country’s oldest chartered court.
“We, members of the West Bengal Bar Association, are compelled to write this instant letter under urgent and dire circumstances,” Bar Council of West Bengal chairman Ashok Kumar Deb wrote to CJI N V Ramana, calling for Justice Bindal’s removal, referring to multiple instances, which have given rise to a “perception that he is an unfair, partial and biased judge and whose continuance at the Hon’ble High Court interferes with fair and impartial dispensation of justice”.
Deb, a lawyer, is also a six-time MLA from Budge Budge, five times as a Trinamool Congress candidate. The 26-member body, which enrolls all state advocates, also has a Trinamool Rajya Sabha MP and a KMC board of administrators member, among its members. “All we seek is fairness and neutrality. We understand this is unprecedented (in Bengal) but we could not be mute spectators anymore,” Deb told TOI.
In the letter dated June 25, citing the manner in which the Narada case was dealt with, Deb claimed Bindal’s conduct indicated that he “did not have any regard for judicial propriety and has committed a mockery of the judicial conscience”.
On May 24, Justice Arindam Sinha had written a letter, in which he took serious exception to the manner in which the Narada bail matter was handled by the division bench. Deb’s letter refers this, too. The Narada case matter is currently being heard by a five-judge bench headed by Justice Bindal.
“The fact that the five-judge bench headed by Justice Bindal has allowed repeated requests by CBI to file its affidavits, but has declined the request made by Mamata Banerjee [chief minister] and Moloy Ghatak [law minister] to file affidavits and contest the matter where serious allegations have been made against them is a clear sign of Justice Bindal’s apparent bias,” Deb’s letter mentions.
Hearing an appeal by Banerjee and Ghatak, the Supreme Court on Friday had asked Calcutta HC to accept fresh applications from them and hear their pleas on June 29 in the Narada case, setting aside the Calcutta HC’s June 9 order refusing their affidavits.
Deb also referred to the case that CM Banerjee had filed before the HC, challenging the victory of Suvendu Adhikari in the assembly elections from Nandigram. The matter had initially been filed and mentioned before the single bench headed by Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya but Justice Bindal later assigned the matter to Justice Kausik Chanda “while being completely and fully aware of Justice Chanda’s long-standing association with BJP”, the letter mentions. “The Chief Justice, being the master of the roster, is expected to exercise the highest standard of judicial propriety. However, the acts and conduct of Justice Bindal prove otherwise. It is a matter of serious concern that a formal application was made before Justice Bindal for reassignment of the matter to a court other than Justice Chanda’s. However, no steps have been taken at Justice Bindal’s end. More surprisingly, the matter continues to be listed before Hon’ble Justice Chanda.”
“We beseech your Lordship to take immediate steps for removal of Justice Rajesh Bindal as a judge of Calcutta High Court so that the majesty and sanctity of the high court is upheld and to ensure peoples’ confidence in the judiciary does not fall to pieces. Unless urgent steps are taken for the removal of Justice Rajesh Bindal, we will be mute spectators to the continuous travesty of justice at the hands of a prejudiced, biased and skewed judge and justice will be denied to the unguarded citizens of this great nation,” the letter adds.
The letter also drew sharp responses. Senior advocate and CPM Rajya Sabha MP Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya said: “The chairman being the author of this letter should have known the jurisdiction of the office he is adorning. He has no authority to write such an obnoxious letter to demean the practising lawyers of the state. His letter amounts to interference with the administration of justice,” adding. “I would request the Chief Justice of India to initiate a suo motu contempt proceeding against the author of that letter.”
“As a statutory body for advocates, we remain within our rights to seek fair and neutral dispension of justice,” Deb responded.