Read Time: 11 minutes
Chatterjee was arrested from his residence in Kolkata after the ED conducted raids at the residential premises of the former State Education Minister and several others and recovered huge cash from the residence of one of his alleged close aides
While emphasising that 'minister parity cannot be claimed' in such cases, the Supreme Court of India today reserved its order on the bail plea of former West Bengal Education Minister Partha Chatterjee in a money laundering case.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, while hearing Chatterjee's bail plea, said, "Rs 28 crore was recovered from your premises and recruitments are from your department. On the face of it, you are a corrupt person! What message do you want us to send to society? That corrupt persons can get bail like this? We want to balance rights."
Justice Kant further went on to ask, "Partha Chatterjee had appointed dummy persons as directors?''. He stressed that there is evidence of properties being purchased jointly in the names of Partha Chatterjee and Arpita Mukherjee after he assumed the position of Minister. It was noted that Chatterjee had placed dummy persons and that the investigation into the case began only after judicial intervention.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for ED, argued that Chatterjee is involved in other cases as well and, therefore, he cannot avail the benefit under Section 438A.
"It's not my case that he shouldn't be granted bail, but look at his role in this case. He is not entitled to bail. My case is don’t grant him bail because I still need to interrogate him. Even if he is granted bail in the ED case, he won’t be released, as he is also facing two other CBI cases," ASG said.
Opposing the said contentions, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing Chatterjee, responded by stating, "This is a great sadistic pleasure." He further argued that everybody in this case is out on bail while pressing for the need for parity. Rohatgi also mentioned the case of Tamil Nadu Minister Senthil Balaji, highlighting the principle of parity in granting bail.
However, Justice Kant, while expressing displeasure said, "There is no minister parity in such cases, Mr Rohatgi."
On 27 November, the Enforcement Directorate told the Supreme Court that 'undeserving candidates were appointed for money' during the hearing of the bail plea of former West Bengal Education Minister Partha Chatterjee in a money laundering case.
The same bench had observed that, "The allegation is that the petitioner was the Education Minister in the government of West Bengal, and there were allegations of large-scale scams in the recruitment of assistant primary teachers for extreme considerations. The allegation is that the petitioner and his associates Arpita Mukherjee and Manik Bhattacharya, were actively involved."
As the bench went on to inquire about the current status of custody it asked, "Are you in judicial custody or CBI custody? We want to segregate the period of judicial custody and police custody in ED and CBI? We will take up the matter on Monday. Just get a copy of when you were arrested by CBI for the first time."
During the course of proceedings, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the ED, told the court that deserving candidates were deprived of their jobs, and undeserving candidates of fifty to sixty thousand were appointed for money.
"First search was conducted at Arpita's place, where, lordship, a huge amount of cash and jewellery worth almost Rs 22 crore were seized. The second search resulted in the seizure of a huge amount from Ananta Textile Private Limited, with cash amounting to Rs 27.93 crore. Arpita Banerjee claims it belongs to Partha Chatterjee," ED added.
However, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Chatterjee, vehemently argued that the petitioner was a Minister and that the period of incarceration under PMLA can only be 7 years. "I have completed more than 1/3rd of the sentence," he said while emphasising that everybody has been granted bail in the present case.
In light of this, the court also expressed concerns about the delay in the trial, saying, "How long can we keep an accused?" It noted that already two and a half years have passed.
Notably, on 7 May, the Supreme Court had stayed the Calcutta High Court's April 22, 2024 judgement quashing the appointment of 23,123 teaching and non-teaching staff in the state made through the State Level Selection Test-2016 (SLST).
The West Bengal government had filed a plea in the Supreme Court questioning the correctness of the Calcutta High Court's order. It also challenged the direction to the candidates who submitted blank OMR sheets but obtained appointments, to return all remunerations and benefits received by them to the State exchequer along with interest calculated at 12 % per annum, from the date of receipt thereof till deposit, within a period of four weeks.
The petitioner had sought an interim stay on the operation of the HC's judgment in the matter.
In what is called as cash-for-job scam, the CBI had arrested former state education minister Partha Chatterjee and other bigwigs and recovered huge caches of cash during the investigation.
On July 2022, A Special Court in Kolkata sent West Bengal Minister and TMC leader Partha Chatterjee to Enforcement Directorate (ED) custody till August 3 in the alleged teachers' recruitment scam during his tenure as the State Education Minister.
Case Title: Partha Chatterjee Vs ED
Please Login or Register
