A bench, headed by Justice BR Gavai, rejected arguments raised by the Union government questioning the maintainability of the original suit filed by the petitioner state under Article 131 of the Constitution.
“We clarify that the aforementioned conclusions are intended to resolve the preliminary objections raised by the respondent (Union Government). However, the same will not matter when the suit is decided on its own merits,” the high court said, ordering that the matter be additionally listed on August 13 to frame the issues in the suit.
Earlier in May, the top court had reserved its verdict on the maintainability issue after hearing oral arguments presented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, and senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the claimant state.
The West Bengal government, in its plea, has referred to the provisions of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 and said that the central agency has been proceeding with investigations and lodging FIRs without obtaining nod from the state government. as required by statute. .
On the other hand, the Center told the top court that a state government cannot claim the right to issue general, broad and general directions to withdraw consent to a CBI probe in any matter.
An affidavit filed by the Union Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) said the state government can exercise the power to grant/reject consent only on a case-by-case basis and for the same good, sufficient reasons. and relevant. to be recorded.
The CBI has filed multiple FIRs in cases of post-poll violence in West Bengal.
The high court had issued notice on the suit in September 2021.
The state government has sought a stay of investigation into FIRs lodged in post-election violence cases by the CBI in compliance with the Calcutta High Court order.
The state government's statement said that the general consent given to the CBI by the Trinamool Congress government had been withdrawn and therefore the FIRs lodged could not proceed.
“We clarify that the aforementioned conclusions are intended to resolve the preliminary objections raised by the respondent (Union Government). However, the same will not matter when the suit is decided on its own merits,” the high court said, ordering that the matter be additionally listed on August 13 to frame the issues in the suit.
Earlier in May, the top court had reserved its verdict on the maintainability issue after hearing oral arguments presented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, and senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the claimant state.
The West Bengal government, in its plea, has referred to the provisions of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 and said that the central agency has been proceeding with investigations and lodging FIRs without obtaining nod from the state government. as required by statute. .
On the other hand, the Center told the top court that a state government cannot claim the right to issue general, broad and general directions to withdraw consent to a CBI probe in any matter.
An affidavit filed by the Union Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) said the state government can exercise the power to grant/reject consent only on a case-by-case basis and for the same good, sufficient reasons. and relevant. to be recorded.
The CBI has filed multiple FIRs in cases of post-poll violence in West Bengal.
The high court had issued notice on the suit in September 2021.
The state government has sought a stay of investigation into FIRs lodged in post-election violence cases by the CBI in compliance with the Calcutta High Court order.
The state government's statement said that the general consent given to the CBI by the Trinamool Congress government had been withdrawn and therefore the FIRs lodged could not proceed.
