The Calcutta High Court on Thursday reserved the judgement on a plea of West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee challenging the Nandigram results in the recently-conducted Assembly elections in the state. The HC reserved its order on a plea by CM Banerjee that the judge assigned to hear her election petition against BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari recuse himself from the case as he was an “active member” of the BJP.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing on behalf of Banerjee, sought for the recusal of Justice Kaushik Chandra before whom the matter was listed. Banerjee appeared before the court of Justice Chandra through teleconference, as directed by him on June 18. Justice Chandra, against whom the recusal petition has been filed, heard the matter and reserved his order. Banerjee had moved the High Court claiming she apprehended that she may not get justice from the judge due to his alleged BJP links. “The BJP has a relationship with you, I request you to step down,” Singhvi told the judge directly.
The bench of Justice Chandra began hearing the case on elections in the Nandigram Assembly constituency at 11am. At the beginning of the hearing, Justice Chandra asked Singhvi, “The case has been registered before June 16. Then why was the neutrality of this case not mentioned?” Justice Chandra expressed dissatisfaction as the state had applied to the Chief Justice. The judge asked, “When was the application made to the Chief Justice? Why didn’t you tell me anything on the 16th? Why didn’t the lawyer tell the court? Did you set an example to the whole country?”
Singhvi replied, “I have gone to the judicial side of the case. We knew the case would go to the bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. Suddenly, on June 16, I came to know that the case has come to your bench.”
Singhvi asked, “Do you want to listen or not? I don’t understand why the bench will not be changed according to the rules. Where is the problem?” Justice Kaushik Chandra said, “Now your application is with the Chief Justice. What can I do? That should be decided in advance.”
The judge said, “This is what happens all over the country. You have already informed the administrative level.” The judge further said, “There are many things in the administrative aspect of the High Court. There are two sides to the case. Administrative and judicial; a judge has to decide what to listen to. Now you have to decide whether to leave the chief’s house or not.”
Chief Minister Banerjee’s lawyer Singhvi took some time. After that, Singhvi said, they are trying to move the case further. The judge can judge judicially. There may be another case. Mamata Banerjee’s lawyer continued to explain why the case had been moved elsewhere. Singhvi kept saying that Kaushik Chandra had met Dilip Ghosh somewhere. Went to some events! “The BJP has a relationship with you,” Singhvi told the judge.
“Who told you I was the head of the legal cell?” the judge questioned. Singhvi questioned how impartial it would be if the Nandigram case was heard in a bench of Justice Kaushik Chandra. The judge asked, “How did you know I was the head of the BJP’s legal cell?” Do you know about the organizational structure of the BJP? ”
“I have a lot of friends in the BJP, I know very well,” he said. The BJP has different types of councils. I have been invited to speak at several meetings there.” Singhvi then raised the issue of the case. Singhvi raised the issue of Amit Shah’s rally. Justice Kaushik Chandra admitted, “Now when I think about it, I am very happy with these cases.”
Mamata Banerjee’s lawyer then referred to several tweets urging the judge to withdraw from the case. Trinamool MP Derek O’Brien’s tweet was highlighted. The judge asked, “Why was nothing said during the hearing the day before about moving the case to another bench?” Chandra said, “On the 17th, a case was filed with. I was not told anything. No order was given. But the media trial went on. Won’t I be impressed as a judge?” Then the judge said, “Give me time to think. Let’s see what can be done.”