Supreme Court Takes Over Caste Certificate Scam Case Amidst High Court Judges’ Rift

SUPREME COURT LAW INSIDER

LI Network

Published on: 29 January, 2024 at 12:48 IST

The Supreme Court has transferred all proceedings related to the caste certificate scam case from the Calcutta High Court to itself due to a dispute between two sitting judges.

The case involves Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay and Justice Soumen Sen, who clashed over contradictory orders.

The Supreme Court refrained from commenting on the judges’ clash, stating that any remarks could affect the dignity of the High Court’s proceedings. However, the top court informed that it would handle the case triggering the controversy and transfer the proceedings to the Supreme Court for further action.

The suo motu case originated after Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay ordered to “ignore” a stay order by Justice Soumen Sen, leading to a controversial situation in the Calcutta High Court.

The Supreme Court, while refraining from commenting on the judges’ tussle, decided to take over the proceedings related to the case.

“We will transfer the proceedings in the writ petition and the letters patent appeal to the Supreme Court. We will list it after a while and deal with it. The plea under Article 226 and letters patent appeal to be transferred to this court. Let pleadings be completed meanwhile,” stated the Supreme Court.

The matter involves a petition alleging the issuance of fake caste certificates in West Bengal. Justice Gangopadhyay ordered a CBI inquiry, which was stayed by a division bench led by Justice Sen.

Despite the stay, Justice Gangopadhyay allowed the handover of the case papers to the CBI, and later, he indicated that the division bench’s judgment should be ignored in another order.

The Supreme Court had stayed the proceedings in both the single-judge and division bench and halted the CBI probe ordered by Justice Gangopadhyay.

The dispute between the judges has drawn attention, with Justice Gangopadhyay previously facing controversy for giving an interview during a case concerning a politician.

The Supreme Court had stayed an order directing its Secretary-General to produce a report related to the interview in that instance.

Related Post