Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay of the high court, who has asked the CBI to probe allegations of irregularities in appointment of teachers and other staff for government-aided schools in Bengal, said in open court on Tuesday he was not sure whether the investigations would yield any result.
He wondered aloud if a probe by a special investigation team would have been more effective. Justice Gangopadhyay also sought to draw the attention of the “rajya pradhan (state chief)” to the allegations.
“I’m tired. I’m fed up with the activities of the CBI. Now I am in a dilemma whether the investigations will yield any fruitful result,” the judge said in open court while talking to senior advocate Kalyan Bandyopadhyay, who is also the Trinamul Congress MP from Serampore.
Advocate Bandyopadhyay came to Justice Gangopadhyay’s court in connection with a case, when the judge made these remarks.
The judge said: “I’m really concerned about the future of so many unemployed persons. Now I have every doubt whether my efforts would mean anything at all.”
At this point, Bandyopadhyay spoke about the CBI’s poor track record. “It is a fact. The performance of the CBI is very bad. This court had in 1993 issued a CBI probe order in the Bhikhari Paswan disappearance case. Till date, the CBI has done nothing,” the lawyer said.
Paswan, a mill worker, had allegedly been picked up from his home in Telenipara, Hooghly, by the police in 1993 in connection with an agitation at Victoria Jute Mills. He never returned, nor was his body found.
His family alleged he had been killed by the police. The police said they had neither picked up Paswan nor were they aware of his whereabouts.
On Tuesday, Bandyopadhyay mentioned one case after another where he said a CBI probe had not thrown any new light — Tapasi Malik’s rape and murder, Rizwanur Rahman’s death, Saradha-Narada. “What did the CBI actually do in these cases,” asked Bandyopadhyay.
“Before 2011, I was a soldier of the party and fought those cases…. In the SSC (recruitment) case, I am defending Partha Chatterjee.”
Chatterjee, who was education minister when the controversial appointments were made, is also under Justice Gangopadhyay’s scanner.
Following what advocate Bandyopadhyay said about the CBI, Justice Gangopadhyay said: “Yes, now I feel a probe by a special investigation team (SIT) would have been a better option. I could have monitored that investigation. I fear the fate of this investigation will also be like the investigation in the case of the Nobel Prize theft.”
The CBI could neither recover Tagore’s stolen Nobel medallion nor arrest the thieves.
Justice Gangopadhay said: “I wonder whether the head
of the state (‘rajya pradhan’) is aware of the facts. The situation is grave. I want the
recruitment process to be transparent. I still hope the head of the state will do something.”
The judge also said: “I believe that the officers of Calcutta police are really efficient and effective.”
Justice Gangopadhyay’s statement has created confusion in legal circles, several lawyers at the high court said.
Some lawyers said the judge wanted to put pressure on the CBI for a faster probe. Others said a chargesheet filed by the CBI in the Tapan Kandu murder case “has opened the eyes of the judge”.
Kandu was Congress councilor in Purulia's Jhalda.
“In the Tapan Kandu murder case, the SIT got only 10 days and arrested four persons. Till date, the CBI
has arrested only one more person and filed the chargesheet accusing five persons, four of whom were arrested by the SIT. The CBI is following the SIT line of probe,” a veteran criminal lawyer said.
