A division bench of Chief Justice T S Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya also directed Bengal govt cops to transfer all FIRs relating to Jan 5 assault on ED officers, who had gone on a raid to Shahjahan’s home in Sandeshkhali, to CBI by the same time.
Accused in land grab, rape, TMC leader Shahjahan Sheikh arrested, CID probe initiated
Mamata Banerjee meets PM Modi amidst row over Sandeshkhali violence, dues Controversy in West Bengal
HC held it “has not only power and jurisdiction, but also an obligation to protect fundamental rights”.
Soon after this order in morning, state govt moved SC, with senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi mentioning the appeal petition before Justice Sanjiv Khanna, who it was learnt, has asked state to submit relevant papers before CJI.
By then, CBI officers had reached the state CID’s headquarters at Bhawani Bhawan. They were in for a long wait before CID officers told them about the state’s appeal and their inability to comply with the HC’s orders before the appeal was heard.
In the meantime, ED moved in to attach Shahjahan’s assests in Sandeshkhali and Kolkata. They attached around Rs 12.7 crore worth of movable and immovable assets in Shahjahan’s and some of his associates’ name. Agency sources said that a total of 14 immovable properties — including apartments, agriculture land, land for fishery, and two bank accounts — have been attached.
The HC, in its order, had noted that Shahjahan was “no ordinary citizen.” “He is an elected representative of the public, holding the highest office in a zilla parishad…. Thus, it has become imperative and absolutely necessary for doing complete justice and enforcing the fundamental rights of the public in general,” the bench said.
The division bench also set aside the single-bench order of conducting investigation by a special investigating team (SIT) comprising members of the CBI and the state police.
Additional solicitor general of India SV Raju had on Monday pleaded for immediate transfer of the investigation to CBI. “The period of 15 days of police custody has started ticking. Five days have passed since the CID has taken the accused in its custody against your order of staying the SIT investigation into the case,” Raju said. He had cited a Supreme Court order, stating that an investigating agency couldn’t take an accused in custody for more than 15 days.
Advocate general Kishore Datta had objected to the transfer of the investigation, citing SC rulings that stipulated that a court could transfer investigation only if there had been a complaint of bias against high state officials and police brass during the investigation. “No allegation in the FIR based on the ED complaint has been made against the state police that constitutes the fundamental ground for transfer of investigation. Neither the complainant (ED) nor the accused (Shahjahan) can have the choice of investigation,” the advocate general said.
‘We Have Obligation To protect fundamental rights
The division bench on Tuesday said the state police had been “over-zealous for reasons best known to them.”
The bench also noted that the circumstances under which the inspector-in-charge of Nazat PS registered an FIR, based on a complaint of Shahjahan’s security guard, Dildar Box Molla, was “clouded with suspicion for more than one reason.” The bench held the complaint was drawn on Jan 6, and the date of the complaint, written in words, prima facie “shows that there was an interpolation.”
The bench agreed with deputy solicitor general Dinesh Trvedi, who had submitted on Monday how the state police “pre-timed” the FIR and tried to frustrate the investigation. “ED officers were assaulted but the first FIR lodged in Nazat PS was by Dildar Box against the ED officers was at 10.30am. The scribe to this complaint by Box is a high court advocate. If the accused had made this advocate write the complaint, then the advocate should have reached Sandeshkhali much before 10am, knowing that the ED team was coming for the raid,” Trivedi had submitted.
The bench also noted that Section 307 of the IPC (attempt to murder) was added to the FIR 12 days days after the FIR was lodged.