The Calcutta High Court on Friday directed All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) MP Abhishek Banerjee to appear before the jurisdictional Magistrate on July 15 for recording of his voice sample in connection with a criminal case arising from his alleged remarks made during the campaign for the West Bengal Assembly elections.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya held that Banerjee was under a legal obligation to cooperate with the ongoing investigation in terms of the Court’s earlier interim order granting him protection from coercive action. The Court clarified that recording of the voice sample formed an integral part of the investigative process and warned that continued non-cooperation could result in withdrawal of the interim protection.
At the same time, it directed the State police to ensure adequate security during his appearance before the investigating agency and the jurisdictional Magistrate, taking note of submissions that several AITC leaders had allegedly been subjected to physical attacks following the recent Assembly elections.
The Court specifically directed the police authorities to take all necessary measures to ensure that Banerjee is not subjected to egg-pelting or any other form of harassment while appearing before the jurisdictional Magistrate or the investigating agency in compliance with the notices issued during the investigation.
The criminal proceedings arise from remarks allegedly made by Banerjee during the Assembly election campaign, in which he reportedly stated that after the declaration of the election results, DJs would play music so loudly in celebration that people’s ears would ring. A voter subsequently lodged a criminal complaint alleging that the statement was provocative, intimidating and capable of influencing voters, leading to the registration of a criminal case and an investigation by the West Bengal Criminal Investigation Department (CID).
Earlier, on May 21, the High Court had restrained the police from taking coercive action against Banerjee until July 31 while making it clear that the interim protection was conditional upon his full cooperation with the investigation and compliance with notices issued by the investigating agency.
During the course of the investigation, the jurisdictional Magistrate permitted the CID to collect Banerjee’s voice sample for forensic examination. Aggrieved by the order, Banerjee filed a criminal revision petition before the High Court challenging the legality of the Magistrate’s direction.
During Friday’s hearing, Justice Bhattacharyya observed that the direction to provide a voice sample fell squarely within the scope of the earlier writ order requiring Banerjee to cooperate with the investigation. The Court held that once interim protection had been granted subject to cooperation, Banerjee was bound to participate in all lawful investigative procedures, including furnishing his voice sample. It therefore declined to examine the merits of the Magistrate’s order, observing that the obligation to cooperate arose independently from the High Court’s own order.
The Court also expressed strong disapproval over Banerjee filing a criminal revision petition before another Bench while his writ petition arising out of the same criminal proceedings remained pending. It observed that the appropriate course would have been to seek modification or clarification of the earlier writ order instead of initiating parallel proceedings before another forum. The Bench remarked that the revision petition appeared to be an attempt to circumvent the earlier judicial order and frustrate the investigation after obtaining interim protection from the writ court. It further indicated that such conduct amounted to an abuse of the judicial process and even cautioned that the petition could have been dismissed with exemplary costs.
Following the Court’s observations, Senior Advocate Ayan Bhattacharjee, appearing for Banerjee, sought permission to withdraw the criminal revision petition. He accepted responsibility for the legal strategy adopted and submitted that filing the revision petition was the result of incorrect legal advice and not attributable to the petitioner. The High Court thereafter permitted withdrawal of the revision petition and directed Banerjee to appear before the jurisdictional Magistrate on July 15 for recording of his voice sample in accordance with the ongoing investigation.
The post Calcutta High Court directs Abhishek Banerjee to give voice sample in West Bengal election campaign case appeared first on India Legal.