New Delhi: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday denied any relief to West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee in a complaint seeking action against her for allegedly disrespecting the national anthem at an event in Mumbai. The High Court noted that there was no need for interference in the matter, reported news agency PTI.
A single judge bench of Justice Amit Borkar dismissed the petition filed by Bengal CM challenging a sessions court order of January 2023, remitting the matter back to the magistrate's court for an inquiry on the issuance of summons.
The Chief Minister in her petition said that the sessions court instead of quashing the summons and remitting the matter ought to have quashed the entire complaint altogether.
Bombay HC held that there is no fault with the order which was passed by the sessions court remitting the matter back for fresh inquiry and to decide on the issuance of the process (summons) afresh.
Sessions court quashed the summons while emphasising that the magistrate's court had not been compiled with the mandate of Sections 200 and 202 of the CrPC. The magistrate under these sections can postpone a case and carry out an inquiry himself or herself or direct the police station with the required jurisdiction.
Chief Minister's lawyer Majeed Memon said that holding an inquiry under the aforementioned sections would cause unwarranted embarrassment and harassment to the CM. J.
However, Borkar refused to accept this argument and said that the purpose of an inquiry under sections 200 and 202 is to decide whether there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused. PTI quoted him as saying, “Direction to hold such an inquiry does not cause any prejudice to the accused. Ultimately if it is found after holding such inquiry that no case is made out, the magistrate is bound to pass an order in accordance with the law.”
The judge also refused to accept Memon’s argument that the sessions court in its order observed that the ingredients of section 3 (preventing or causing disturbance while singing the national anthem) of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act were not made out in the present case.
Judge further said, “The applicant (Banerjee) has misread the session's court order. There is no finding recorded by sessions court that offence under section 3 is not made out.”
The sessions court had simply stated that the magistrate was not justified in issuing the process (summons) on the grounds that an investigation under sections 200 and 202 had not been completed, the high court added.
The court cited a Supreme Court ruling that stated it was not correct for a sessions court in revision to consider the whole complaint on merits and dismiss the same on merits.
He added, “Order of issuance of the process was faulted only on the ground of section 200 and 202. In my opinion, the course adopted by sessions judge of not deciding the matter on merits and remitting the matter back to the magistrate's court was in consonance with the SC order and hence no fault can be found. Therefore, no interference is required. The application is dismissed.”
The bench also ruled that the accused has no right to take part in the proceedings before the magistrate until the court issues a summon, a long-standing legal principle.
On the basis of a complaint made by Vivekanand Gupta, a magistrate's court summoned Banerjee in March of last year. Vivekanand Gupta claimed that during a public event at Mumbai's Yashwantrao Chavan Auditorium at Cuffe Parade, Banerjee began singing the National Anthem while seated, later stood up and sang two verses of the anthem, then abruptly stopped and left the location.
The summons had been contested by the chief minister before the special court.
On procedural grounds, special judge R N Rokade overturned the magistrate's summons in January 2023 and requested that the magistrate reexamine the case.
Banerjee, who is also the founder chairperson of the All India Trinamool Congress, in her application in HC challenged this order claiming that the summons ought to have been quashed instead of directing the magistrate to consider the same afresh.
According to Gupta's complaint, Banerjee's action violated the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act of 1971 since it disrespected and insulted the national anthem.
Gupta initially reported the incident to the Cuffe Parade police department. After no action was taken by the police on it, he filed a complaint before the Metropolitan Magistrate.