Justice Chanda Of Calcutta HC Exits From The Nandigram Poll Result Case
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.
View all posts by this Author
By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2021-07-07 14:02:55
About the Author
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.
View all posts by this Author
Although Justice Kaushik Chanda of the Calcutta High Court has exited from the case chief minister Mamata Banerjee had filed challenging her electoral loss in Nadigram to BJP's Suvendhu Adhikari, he termed the chief minister's action of writing to the CJ asking for his removal for "conflict of interest" a "preplanned move to malign a judge" and imposed a Rs 5 lakh fine on her. The TMC has also alleged that Justice Chanda was previously involved with the BJP.
But one thing which Justice Chanda said and which is very pertinent to the present demand of removing a judge from the case was when he questioned the chief minister's logic that he could be biased against her as she had objected to his confirmation as a permanent judge of the Calcutta HC. Justice Chanda said that if that yardstick was to be applied, no judge of the Calcutta HC would be fit enough to hear the case as she must have "either objected to or confirmed the appointment" of all judges.
It is clear that if someone can fear bias against self for having objected to an appointment, it can also be said that if a judge who was recommended or approved for posting hears the case, he or she might favour the person. If bias is important, then favour is also equally important and the same yardstick has to be applied.
Conflict of interest is a serious matter. But lately, it is being used in a cavalier manner. Also the matter of asking judges to exit cases for this or that reason is getting out of hand. When the CJ of a High Court assigns a case, normally there should not be any objection unless the conflict is serious or a point of law is involved. Judges perform their duty according to law as per materials placed before them. If there is any bias in the judgment, it is open to the petitioner to go for an appeal. But aspersions should not be cast on judges even before they hear cases and pronounce judgments as it amounts to putting pressure on the judiciary.
