RB News World Latest News
Related Articles
Calcutta High Court: The matter of ongoing conflict between the judges in Calcutta High Court has reached the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court itself took cognizance of this matter on Friday (January 26). Now a five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose will hear this case.
The single bench led by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay had ignored the order of the double bench and accused Justice Soumen Sen, who was presiding over the double bench, of working for a political party. The Supreme Court will hear this case today i.e. on Saturday (January 27) from 10:30 am. Amidst all this, this question might be coming in people’s mind that what is the whole controversy after all. Let’s take a look at this controversy.
What is Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay vs Justice Soumen Sen case?
- According to Live Law, recently a petition came in the Calcutta High Court, in which it was said that caste certificates are being issued fraudulently in West Bengal. A large number of students have taken admission in medical courses using these caste certificates. On this petition, on the morning of January 24 (Wednesday), the single bench of Justice Gangopadhyay ordered the West Bengal Police to hand over all the documents related to this case to the CBI and the CBI should investigate the entire matter. He had said that he had no faith in the state police.
After this order, the West Bengal government approached the division bench of the Calcutta High Court. After this, the division bench of Justice Soumen Sen and Uday Kumar stayed the order of the single bench for CBI investigation in the case.
On Thursday, the single bench of Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay said that the order passed by the division bench is completely illegal and should be ignored.
Justice Gangopadhyay asked the Advocate General as to which rule allows a double bench to stay a single bench order. He said that when there was no appeal application in this case then how could the order be passed.
Not only this, Justice Gangopadhyay in his order accused Justice Sen, who was leading the bench, of working for a political party in the state and said that for this reason there is a need to re-examine the orders passed by the bench headed by Justice Sen. Is required.
