On May 8, the Calcutta High Court pulled up Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Abhishek Banerjee for opposing the Court’s earlier order directing a probe into his involvement in the ‘School Jobs for Cash Scam.’ The Court asked the TMC leader what was troubling him and why he can’t co-operate with the probe, as ordered.
“If suppose there is an investigation, why can’t you co-operate? What is troubling you? The court has merely ordered for a probe and no one is above an investigation. Let me know what is troubling you? What is the difficulty?” the Court asked Abhishek Banerjee’s counsel.
The Court further remarked, “You are not above law, stop being extra-apprehensive.” The Court’s remark came after Banerjee’s counsel requested an audience from the bench in the proceedings wherein the petitioner sought for the implementation of the Court’s April 13 order, passed by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, directing a CBI and ED probe into the TMC leader’s involvement in the ‘School Jobs for Cash Scam.’
The Court rejected Banerjee’s counsel’s submission that since the order affects his client, then he should be given an opportunity to be heard.
The Court said, “In the midst of an investigation, several names might crop up. But that doesn’t mean that each and every person will have to be given notice prior to the probe. All that the person has to do is co-operate with the probe. Please understand, no body is above the law and not even you. So stop giving too much importance.”
Thereafter, Banerjee’s counsel submitted that his client apprehends an adverse action. The Court said, “Stop being extra apprehensive. I see nothing against you at least at this stage. Only probe is ordered against a speech. Let them proceed. You have no right to be heard at this stage.”
The Court also reserved orders on the Mamata Banerjee Government’s revision application, filed against the Court’s April 13 order directing a CBI and ED probe into the scam. The State Government’s counsel, Advocate General SN Mookerjee, argued that the judge had no determination to pass orders on the given date.
Furthermore, the counsel contended that if a crime has taken place in the state, then it is a question of law and order then only the state can conduct the probe. “The investigation could be transferred to the CBI or even ED, only in rarest of rare instances and the instant case, as per me, isn’t a rarest of rare case. In fact, the concerned department wasn’t available before the court. Due to government holiday, all public offices were shut that day,” the counsel said.
