NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned the hearing of a case filed by the West Bengal government alleging that the CBI was moving ahead with its probe into the post-poll violence case without seeking pre-approval from the state under the law.
A bench of Justices L Nageshwar Rao and VV Nagarathana noted that the appeals in this regard were complete and the case was adjourned for hearing in the third week of February.
It also asked the parties to submit a written submission in this regard.
Attorney General KK Venugopal said the case raised questions of constitutional law and asked for two days to argue the Supreme Court’s indication that it wanted to end the hearing within a day.
Senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, appearing for the West Bengal government, said it was a matter of jurisdiction and the hearing would not take too long.
The Center had earlier told the apex court that it had nothing to do with the cases of post-vote violence registered by the CBI in West Bengal and that the state government had made India a party in the case and was not maintainable.
Venugopal submitted that the CBI was an autonomous body set up under a special law of Parliament to register and investigate cases and the Center had no role in it.
The Center had earlier told the apex court that West Bengal’s ability to withhold the consent of the CBI was not absolute and that the investigating agency was entitled to conduct investigations against central government employees or affect Pan-India.
The Center had filed an affidavit in response to a case filed by the West Bengal government alleging that the CBI was proceeding with an investigation into a post-poll violence case without pre-requisite approval from the state under the law.
It told the apex court that the Union of India had not registered any case in West Bengal nor was it investigating any case.
The affidavit said that numerous investigations were being carried out against central government employees or that Pan-India had influenced or influenced multiple states to investigate such crimes.
It said West Bengal’s consent was sought for some of the crimes, but it was not clear why the state government embarked on an investigation that would have the inevitable effect of protecting such multi-state criminals. Pan-India crime.
The West Bengal government, in its original civil case under Article 131 of the Constitution, referred to the provisions of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 and said that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was continuing its investigation and had lodged an FIR. Obtaining approval from the State Government as mandatory under the Act.
Under Article 131, the apex court has the primary jurisdiction to deal with disputes between the Center and the States.
The CBI has lodged multiple FIRs in connection with the post-poll violence in West Bengal.
The state government, following an order of the Calcutta High Court, sought stay of the investigation into the FIRs filed by the CBI in the post-poll violence case.
The lawsuit alleges that the general consent given by the Trinamool Congress government to the central agency was withdrawn, so the FIRs filed could not be forwarded.
There has been talk of postponing such FIRs in the future.

!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s) {if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)}; if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′; n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’, ‘’); fbq(‘init’, ‘593671331875494’); fbq(‘track’, ‘PageView’); .

Read More World News

Keep Reading Latest Breaking News

Source link