Narada Scam Case: 5-Judge Bench Of Calcutta HC To Continue Hearing CBI’s Transfer Application

AG Datta claims that their affidavit is not an attempt to fill any lacunae, as alleged by SG Tushar Mehta.

calcutta_high_court

Kolkata: Last week, Supreme Court had requested the High Court to decide the applications to be filed by State of West Bengal, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and State Law Minister GhatakMoloy explaining the reasons for delay in filing their counter affidavits.

AG Kishore Datta appeared for state Government. AG Datta said that they have served advance copies of their applications to the CBI. CBI has also filed its reply in opposition to the applications filed by State, he said. 

ACJ Bindal questioned, What are your reasons? Why did you not file? State was represented from day 1.

Responding to this, Datta said they were impleaded on May 27. On June 2, CBI concluded its submissions. On June 7, State requested the Court to take on record its affidavit in opposition. He added that records of alleged events are with State and thus, its affidavit must be taken on record to ascertain the true picture of law and order situation on May 17.

AG Datta claims that their affidavit is not an attempt to fill any lacunae, as alleged by SG Tushar Mehta.

Providing security is the job of State. Therefore it should have an opportunity to present actual state of affairs before this Court, indicating where the State sprung into action and where it failed: AG Datta

AG Datta denied the allegation levelled by CBI that the State is trying to support the accused TMC leaders. CBI has alleged that there are 'curious consistencies' in the affidavits filed by accused and by State.

Bench asked, It is a question of merits. You first address us on why the affidavits were not filed in time.

AG Datta said that the sum & substance of their application is that CBI has no denied (i) security is job of State (ii) Records of law and order situation is lying with State (iii) There will be no loss of time if affidavits are taken on record.

AG Datta citing judgments where filing of affidavits was allowed in cases where serious factual disputes were involved.

AG Datta said as per Rule 38, it has 4 weeks period starting from May 27 to file affidavits. So there is no delay on its part.

Bench asked AG Datta what will happen if arguments are concluded before expiration of 4 weeks. Can you come and say after entire hearing is over that my 4 weeks have not expired?