Calcutta High Court objected to remarks attributed to TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee on judges during a hearing in Kolkata
The bench said Banerjee, as an elected representative and educated person, could not be treated like an ordinary layperson
The court was hearing Banerjee’s writ petition challenging the downgrade of his security cover from Z+ to X category
On Thursday, the Calcutta High Court objected to remarks attributed to TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee that were said to cast aspersions on part of the judiciary. Justice Krishna Rao said an elected representative and an educated person could not be treated like an ordinary layperson.
The bench was hearing Banerjee’s writ petition on the downgrade of his security cover from Z+ to X category. PTI reported that it made clear the comments would not shape its ruling on that plea.
The controversy stemmed from a televised interview, which the West Bengal government said amounted to criminal contempt of court. At the end of the hearing, the bench reserved its order.
State Contempt Bid
The state pressed for contempt action.
Additional Advocate General Billwadal Bhattacharya, appearing for the state, asked the bench to begin suo motu contempt proceedings against Banerjee. PTI reported that he placed before the court a transcript of the interview and a pen drive with its video recording.
Bhattacharya said Banerjee had targeted the judiciary by naming a judge. He argued that the comments were an assault on a constitutional institution by a sitting MP.
PTI reported that Bhattacharya submitted: “This case is covered under the Contempt of Courts Act. This cannot be allowed to continue.”
Banerjee Defence
Banerjee’s side disputed the state's stand.
Senior advocate Shoeb Alam, appearing for Banerjee, said the interview remarks had no connection with the relief sought in the writ petition. He said they were made against the backdrop of alleged attacks on Banerjee’s home while his wife and children were present, and after repeated efforts to obtain protection from the authorities.
Alam described the remarks as an “expression of exasperation” and said they should not stand in the way of relief. He told the court that Banerjee was asking for protection of his fundamental right to life under Article 21, had faced six attacks and that the state’s failure to ensure proper security pointed to a breakdown of law and order.
PTI reported that Alam said: “There is no denial of the fact that my client is under threat. I am only seeking an emergency review of his security and that his security cover be increased in the meanwhile.”
Judge's Remarks
Justice Rao asked: “You ask your client, who are the judges with the BJP and who aren't... since he is so intelligent, let him give a list. I will see.”
The bench said Banerjee, as an educated person and a sitting MP, could not be treated like an ordinary layperson. PTI reported that Justice Rao said: “Your client is writing the ACR (Annual Confidential Report) of the judges.”
If Banerjee was unhappy with an earlier order, the court said, he could have gone before another bench. It noted that vacation benches were available for such grievances.
The bench also said the dispute over the interview should not affect the security petition. PTI reported that Justice Rao observed: “Because of one publication, the writ petition should not be affected. I will take into account everything and pass orders.”
The hearing then ended, and PTI reported that Alam said: “I am grateful for the dispassionate hearing regardless of what has happened. I will counsel my client.” The court reserved its order on the plea.
Earlier Allegations
The present dispute followed remarks Banerjee made after an alleged attack on his home in Kalighat in south Kolkata on November 7. A visibly agitated Banerjee then accused a section of the judiciary, among others, of ignoring threats to his security.
PTI quoted Banerjee as saying: “This is not the first attack orchestrated on me. It began on June 19 when I visited Sonarpur and continued till the day I returned from Delhi. A man who was visible in photographs with Suvendu Adhikari tried to kill me at the airport with a gun. I filed a police complaint, but no action was taken against the accused.”
PTI quoted Banerjee as saying: “I moved high court. The court heard the matter partially. The matter was listed for hearing on 13th at Justice Krishna Rao's court. Perhaps there was some kind of pressure from these people, as a result of which the court did not complete the hearing. Later, before the vacation bench started functioning, my petition was listed as item no. 16. The judge heard till case no. 15 and left the court because the next in line matter was a writ petition about my security.”
PTI quoted Banerjee as saying: “We are fighting the BJP-sponsored anarchy, the police's incompetence, the torture of a section of politicians and the high court's inexplicable silence. The court hearing has been continuing for the last three months. I am not bothered about my security, but my concern is, if this can happen to an MP, where does the security of a common man lie.”
