BREAKING: Chief Justice of India SA Bobde on the administrative side allocates the Bengal election agent matter to Court 11. Matter is before Justices Indira Banerjee and Krishna Murari. Matter to be heard TODAY
The election agent to a candidate contesting the West Bengal Assembly elections from Nandigram has moved Supreme Court against an ex parte order of the Calcutta High Court which revived charges of unlawful assembly and violence.
Hearing to commence shortly
@MamataOfficial #SupremeCourt
Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra: I am appearing for WB. Certain people was allowed the benefit.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi for the caveator: this was mentioned behind my back. No notice of mentioning was sent to us.

Justice Banerjee: it was not mentioned before us
Rohatgi: this is not how matters are listed

Luthra: there was a mail sent. No question to intimate again and again

Senior Adv Singh: This was a politically motivated petition in the High Court
Luthra: There were certain matters where orders were passed under 321 CrPC. Relevant orders were passed. APP had filed an application to withdraw the cases filed against some people lodged during the Nandigram agitation
Senior Adv Singh: This is Nandigram violence. Trial court had accepted the Section 321 CrPC applications. Trial court stated that it has perused order withdrawing prosecution against people
Singh: Trial court accepted. Then BJP leader files a PIL in High Court and charges are revived ex parte. I am election agent of the Chief Minister and I am completely disabled. This is unheard of and bizarre
Singh: After order of HC, trial court proceedings commended. GRO was directed to issue summons and warrants of arrest who did not surrender. This was the land acquisition case in Nandigram violence and withdrawal was there as peace prevailed
Singh: We want a stay as by an ex parte order criminal proceedings have started. I can go to the HC and argue in the interim

@DrAMSinghvi for West Bengal: state government has been given powers by this very Court to withdraw such cases in political agitations
Singhvi refers to a judgement: This order could not have been passed. It was said this decision of withdrawal vests with the APP or the policy decision of the state concerned. The Calcutta HC has delivered a completely erroneous judgment
Singhvi: Mass agitation was Nandigram..

Rohatgi: These are not agitation cases, these are murdering and kidnapping cases

Singhvi: you are murdering the arguments..
Singhvi: An elected government for the purpose of creating good will can decide to withdraw such cases. Here it's being decided in a PIL by an ex parte order.
@MamataOfficial .@DrAMSinghvi
Singhvi: I don't know a single case in the annals of judicial history where a PIL has given such directions. Judge says horse having bolted now we close the door. This is completely reversing the order.
Singhvi: See the tentative tentativeness of the Calcutta High Court order (continues reading)
Singhvi: This is not a right of ABC. this order is a stereotype as it covers everyone else. Interim plea was allowed in entirety.

Singh: petitioner in High Court is member of BJP legal cell, that is the interesting point
Singh: This is brazen and this man is a @BJP4India man.

Justice Banerjee: In Madras HC I had delivered a judgment in a PIL by a DMK member who wanted to transfer the Guthka scam probe and held that if real illegality is shown then we cannot shut our eyes
Singhvi: We are on something else. CM @MamataOfficial is standing from Nandigram and that is why you target her election agent and then through a PIL by a @BJP4Bengal leader. Now election is there. Election agent is the alter ego of main candidate
Singh: High Court can take a final view once we are impleaded and we are heard. But this order needs to be stayed

Senior Adv Luthra: Please see the timing. Order was passed in Feb and June 2020. Writ comes in March 2021. The timing is just before the #WestBengalElections
Luthra: once prosecution continues where will be the reprieve?? Now by this HC order the order under 321 had been set aside which was a sacrosanct issue. HC order is doing violence on criminal law
Rohatgi: We will show what violence is now see.. wholesale orders were passed by the trial court
Rohatgi: Supians plea should be dismissed with cost as they have lied in #SupremeCourt. State and Supian says withdrawal of cases dealt with mass agitation in Nandigram. The cases withdrawn are under Sectio 302, 364A and under explosives Act. Both pleas state falsehood
Rohatgi: How blatantly false averments have been made. Plea must be dismissed with cost

Justice Murari: States petition is not before us.
Justice Banerjee: Order was passed on March 5, 2021

Singh: Matter was listed in Calcutta High Court on March 12, 21 and not taken up

Rohatgi: Mr Supian does not tell you that he has filed an anticipatory bail plea in the High Court ?
Justice Banerjee: How many persons released face charges of murder

Rohatgi: all face murder charges

Singh: my friend does not know the law. There cannot be discharge if chargesheet is filed. Else it is acquittal. This is contrary to law and continue keep arguing.
Rohatgi: please allow me to argue why is he interrupting??

Singh: Please look at Section 321 crpc. Just because BJP wanted to file a case..

Rohatgi: Don't talk about @BJP4Bengal talk about your own client (leaves screen)
Singh: Its a case of discharge. Mr Rohatgi can't keep arguing like this. Considering the stage of the issue, accused was discharged. There was no acquittal. They were not charged under Section 302 or charge was framed

Rohatgi: Can I argue now?
Rohatgi: All cases are of Section 302 and chargesheet has been filed. It is pending before sessions Court. Mr Supian has been absconding since 13 years. Chargesheet filed against him in 6 cases. My plea states what the offence is.
Rohatgi: This order was passed when state govt was there. All this is happening at the behest of the state. They don't even file application under 321 and they say withdrawal will bring peace by letting go murder accused. They are appearing in thr matter today too
Rohatgi: Peace cannot be restored under Section 302 offence. Accused was present there, thus was because he was threatened. De facto complainant was examined and he raised no objection. This is a shocking case where such cases are being withdrawn.
Rohatgi: He is facing 6 cases. What use is it of saying BJP, BJP. This is the manner they are letting out these people which includes goondas

Justice Banerjee: these orders were passed in Feb 2020

Rohatgi: These orders were passed under the cloak of secrecy. No one knows
Rohatgi: Chief Justice of Calcutta HC is hearing connected cases and in identical matters the court has quashed such lower court orders
Rohatgi: Is public interest going going be served by letting loose murderers and absconders?
Rohatgi: HC had held that the kind of liberty granted to accused in the case was against the provisions of CrPC. now they say ex parte but did not attend 302 proceedings in the last 10 years. They must be put to where they belong.
Rohatgi: Advocate General appeared on Court and I objected saying accused cannot be heard. He should be in jail for murder. They filed the plea 4 days ago and mentioned it at the last moment. Ends of justice will be met if you do not interfere and HC hears the case tomorrow
Advocate mentions that Division bench could not take it up as Justice Nijjar passed away

Justice Banerjee: what ? When?

Luthra: today morning. He was not feeling well. He was taken to the hospital. He passed away
Luthra: Story of COVID does not work always. Please read their pleading. Charge was before CJM. It does not say there were charges. Chargesheet is before magistrate. No question of committal

Singh: Mr Rohatgi needs to learn criminal law

Rohatgi: You keep your law to yourself
Judges discuss
Justice Banerjee: which are the proceedings which was before the Division bench today ?

Rohatgi; this case was there, there are some letter parents appeal against a single bench order. There is anticipatory bail plea by Mr Supian also there
Justice Banerjee: Matter which could not be heard today will be heard on Monday

Singh: We want a complete stay

Rohatgi: we want a complete dismissal
Justice Banerjee: The manner in which the order had been passed it is difficult to counter them. Nature of offence is also not mentioned (refers to order of trial court)

Justice Banerjee: For Division bench since it appeared today...
Singh: I am the election agent of @MamataOfficial and I am disabled. Monday is a holiday in Calcutta
Adv Suhaan Mukherjee: It was supposed to come on 24th and it didn't come up. Then Bengal has dol too along with Holi.

Rohatgi: you are coming after three weeks here after High Court order
Luthra: was it a case to interfere a year later when it's it's ex parte order.

Rohatgi: These are murderers and gangsters

Luthra: Everyone against you is a gangster
Singh: After discharge I am a necessary party and notice had to be issued first and then stay. But reverse was done. We are seeking full stay.

Rohatgi: Consider the substance and equity of the case
Justice Indira Banerjee: We are sending this Writ Petition back to Calcutta High Court. We are not interfering.

Singh: Please grant protection from coercive steps
Orders: Justice Banerjee: This SLP is against an order dated March 5, 2021, in a PIL whereby the order date Feb 10, 2020 passed by ACJM Contai, discharging the petitioner (Supian) from case initiated against him....
Order:.... There were other orders discharging accused person which which we are not concerned at this stage. From the order of the Calcutta HC division bench it appears that the overdone who have been discharged have been directed to be respondents in the writ.
Order... the writ petitions are due to been heard. All contentions may be raised in the writ before Calcutta HC.
Order: however since the order which affects the petitioner was passed without hearing him. We deem it appropriate to pass an interim order staying the operation of March 5 order and protection from coercive action for 2 weeks or till HC hears the plea
Order: SLP disposed off.

Rohatgi: please do not stay the order and only grant protection.

Bench does not agree with Senior Adv Rohatgi.

Senior Adv Luthra: Registry has to be careful so that the West Bengal appeal reaches you. Litigants are embarrassed like this
Justice Banerjee: This case was assigned to us in the lunch break after it was mentioned before CJI. Papers in connection with Supian vs Dipak Misra was forwarded to this bench but not the appeal of State of West Bengal. We therefore take up the diary no 8430 of 2021 for now
Justice Banerjee: only plea by Supian is disposed off.

Dr Singhvi: Thank you for the patient hearing.

Justice Banerjee: We enjoy this and liked hearing all of you.

[BREAKING] Supreme Court grants ad-interim stay on Calcutta HC order reviving Nandigram violence cases against Mamata Banerjee's Election Agent, SK Supian

report by @DebayonRoy


@MamataOfficial @AITCofficial…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Bar & Bench

Bar & Bench Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @barandbench

26 Mar
Delhi High Court Women Lawyers Forum to shortly hold a session in view of the designation of six women advocates as Senior Advocates.

The theme of the event is "Celebrating Women's Successes in Litigation".

#DelhiHighCourt #SeniorAdvocate
The speakers for the evening are newly designated senior advocates Deepika Marwah, Garima Prashad, Neelima Tripathi, Nitya Ramakrishnan, Suruchi Aggarwal and Malvika Trivedi.

Session begins.

Kritika Gupta welcomes the participants.
Read 78 tweets
26 Mar
Senior Adv Vikas Singh says an election agent in Bengal is facing a criminal case in West Bengal where a dead case had been "revived"

Singh: All cases has been revived

Senior Adv Abhishek Manu Singhvi appears for West Bengal
Singh: the High Court has revived it and it relates to the Nandigram land acquisition matter. I cannot function as an agent.

CJI says a special bench may take it up during vacations. Anything can happen in political rivalry. I will see this on administrative side for bench
The election agent in question is a Nandigram election agent.
Read 4 tweets
26 Mar
[Day 10] 5-judge Constitution bench of Supreme Court will continue hearing the challenge to Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act which provides educational and employment reservation to #Marathas.

Read an account of the hearing yesterday:

[Maratha quota case] Reservations may go, only EWS may remain, but these are policy matters for Government to decide: Supreme Court - Live Updates…
Read 33 tweets
26 Mar
#SupremeCourt to pronounce judgment in the case pertaining to the transfer of jailed politician Mukhtar Ansari from Punjab to Uttar Pradesh.
The Punjab government, arguing against the transfer in front of a bench of justices Ashok Bhushan and RS Reddy, said that Ansari can appear for cases underway in Uttar Pradesh via video-conferencing
Ansari is lodged in district jail Rupnagar, Punjab since Jan 2019 in an extortion case after his alleged call from his UP jail cell to a company CEO in Mohali. He is also accused of 38 heinous crimes in UP but he has been acquitted in most of them due to lack of evidence
Read 4 tweets
26 Mar
CJI SA Bobde led bench to hear Sushant Singh Rajput's sister Priyanka's appeal against Bombay High Court order which did not quash Rhea Chakraborty's FIR against her where it was alleged that Singh along with Dr. Tarun had administering banned medicines to #SushantSinghRajput
Challenging an FIR registered on the basis of this complaint before the Bombay High Court, Priyanka Singh had claimed that the FIR was lodged to “concoct a whole new story entirely different from the statements made” by Chakraborty before the Supreme Court and media platforms.
However, Bombay HC had held "There is prima facie case found against Priyanka Singh and there should not be any impediment against investigation against her."

Read 7 tweets
26 Mar
CJI SA Bobde led bench to shortly hear an urgent plea by a member of the Rohingya community, Mohammad Salimullah, seeking directions to release and protect over 150 Rohingya refugees reportedly “detained” in Jammu and to grant them refugee card
A Jammu based NGO, Forum for Human Rights and Social Justice has also filed an application stating that an earlier plea filed to stop the Rohingya deportation must not be entertained since the settlement of the Rohingyas in Jammu was "a part of a larger design"
Advocate Prashant Bhushan: This is the Rohingya issue

CJI: Where is the ICJ judgment? We have not recieved it
Read 41 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!