A 5-judge Bench of Calcutta High Court is hearing the plea moved by the CBI to transfer the Narada scam case presently pending before a special court to the High Court.

Recently, the Court had granted interim bail to the four TMC leaders, Firhad Hakim, Subrata Mukherjee, Madan Mitra and Sovan Chatterjee, who were arrested by the CBI in relation to the case on May 17.

Read an account of the last hearing here.

Live updates from the hearing today feature here

Dr. Singhvi reading out affidavit filed by Firhad Hakim in relation to mobocracy argument made by CBI.

As per affidavit, CBI and accused sought virtual hearing on May 17 by special court but there was no mention of mobocracy. CBI simultaneously sent email to High Court but suppressed the same initially

Firhad Hakim himself when he came out car asked crowd to disperse. Since CBI gave no notice of arrest, there was no occasion to orchestrate any actions by the crowds: Dr. Singhvi

It is denied that Kalyan Bandhopadhyay forcefully entered CBI. He entered after obtaining requisite permission from CBI: Dr. Singhvi from Hakim's affidavit

The FIR is of 2017 and sting of 2014. Accused has cooperated with accused and there is no single instance of non-cooperation.

I cannot go and have coffee with them but I have cooperated whenever asked: Dr. Singhvi from Firhad Hakim's affidavit.

Singhvi says law minister did not go to the third floor of building where special court is situated.

What is verification of the affidavit? Acting CJ Rajesh Bindal.

Law Minister was not present in court room at anytime. CCTV evidence will show it: Dr. Singhvi.

There is no submission by the CBI that they could not produce any evidence. They in fact produced physical copy for charge-sheet and they themselves had sought virtual hearing: Dr. Singhvi

Protests by certain leaders is no intention to impede process of law. Because someone is a high official does not mean that person will tamper with evidence. Then any accused minister can be arrested after 7 years without any ground: Dr. Singhvi

Dr. Singhvi continues reading out the affidavit claiming there was no event occurrence or concerned effort to intimidate or impeded judiciary by any Constitutional functionaries.

To be caged parrot is bad. But to uncage it to such an extent that it flies into each and every house and wreak havoc is worse: Dr. AM Singhvi.

There was no obstruction to CBI officials entering special court. The hearing was held virtually with judge sitting in his chamber. There was no argument of obstruction addressed before special court. It was an afterthought: Dr. Singhvi from Firhad Hakim's affidavit

It is denied that CBI argued case virtually because they were under siege: Dr. AM Singhvi

Dr. Singhvi now refering to State of West Bengal affidavit.

Bench says it has not taken the same on record.

Dr. AM Singhvi says it is upto Bench to take it on record or reject it.

SG Tushar Mehta objects to it.

Dr. Singhvi says it is the prerogative of Bench to accept or exclude it.

Dr. Singhvi proceeds to read it but Tushar Mehta objects.

Mehta says the affidavit come after 20 days of incident and is sworn by person who had no knowledge of what happened at the CBI office

Bench says it will allow Singhvi to read. Will take a call on whether to consider these submissions or not, later.

Dr. Singhvi starts reading West Bengal government affidavit.

All gatherings were outside gate of CBI office at Nizam Palace and not inside. No dharna inside as alleged: Dr. Singhvi reading out WB affidavit

It is open to CBI to file CCTV recordings which are in their control and file a complaint. This is very very important: Dr. Singhvi

The fact that CBI did not file any complaint shows there was no grave law and order situation as alleged: Dr. Singhvi

Similarly, no evidence, photograph or recording produced by CBI to show there was such large gatherings inside special court: Dr. Singhvi

Importantly other special judges in the complex were functioning normally: Dr. Singhvi.

If for ends of justice this case is transferred to a relatively safer place where there is minimal chance of reaction by leaders and people, do you have objection and why not: Justice IP Mukerji

Singhvi says he will answer. This special court is truly special because all other special judges were functioning. Only this court as per CBI is vitiated: Dr. Singhvi.

Kolkata police has no received no complaints from CBI or CRPF as regards Nizam police. Kolkata police had provided unhindered access to and from CBI office: Dr. Singhvi

The photographs submitted were unverified and unauthenticated and do not prove any such claims that thousand of people were present in court but only showed media persons.

It all is smoke and mirrors: Dr. Singhvi.

Bench rises for lunch. Hearing to resume at 2 pm.

Dr. Singhvi refers to cases laws on transfer petitions.

No universal rule can be laid down for it. General allegation of surcharged atmosphere not sufficient to transfer trial: Dr. Singhvi

The delicious irony is that CBI kept filing affidavits though it now wants West Bengal affidavit excluded.

Everytime SG appeared, an additional affidavit was filed: Dr. Singhvi

Dr. Singhvi now moves on to his next argument - violation of natural justice.

Natural justice is a salutory principle of common law but it has now been made integral part of Article 14: Dr. Singhvi

In one case court is mandated to allow natural justice. In a second category, it is excluded on grounds of national security again through law.

In third category statute is silent. But in such cases common law steps in as per Mandela Gandhi v. Union of India: Dr. Singhvi

Singhvi now moves on to sanction issue.

He gives chronology of events:

FIR - 2017

Application for sanction - Jan 2021

CM sworn in - May 5

Governor grants sanction - May 7

Cabinet sworn in - May 10

Dr Singhvi cites 1998 judgment of Supreme Court in Narasimha Rao case.

Have you challenged decision of Governor? Asks Bench

Dr Singhvi replies in negative but says he is pointing this out for different reason.

Dr. Singhvi cites Gujarat Lokayukta case.

Governor means State government. The default mode is Governor is fully bound by State govt: Dr. Singhvi

However, same judgment says there can be exceptions and one such exception is by way of special statute when Governor will be 'persona designata': Dr. Singhvi

Now coming to our case. Your Lordships have heard of sprints. This is a lesson for CM not to swear themselves in first and then cabinet because some misguided soul will interpret it as Constitutional vacuum: Dr. Singhvi.

This interregnum between May 5 when Mamata Banerjee was sworn in and cabinet was sworn in on May 10, there was a 1000 yard sprint to Raj Bhavan to get sanction when Council of Ministers and Speaker have not been sworn in yet: Dr. Singhvi

How is it even imaginable that you won't even go to Council of Ministers. It is in such cases that High Courts have to step in. There is no law against such ingenuity which I call complete shallowness: Dr. Singhvi.

Four Constitutional authorities completely bypassed: Dr. Singhvi

Was this sanction issue before the court: Bench

Dr. Singhvi says since SG Tushar Mehta raised mobocracy issue alone, he can raise this issue to show legal malice.

If sanction issue is granted, then arrest itself is void ab-initio: Bench

I am saying Mehta is raising only mobocracy issue. So then I can show him that they did not even have sanction. I am not saying this court should quash sanction: Dr. Singhvi

Dr. Singhvi says he would leave it to Court's discretion on the sanction aspect.

Dr. Singhvi now moves on to his next point on Section 407.

Textually, Section 407(1) clearly requires formation of an opinion.

As per, Section 407(3) an application in writing must exist: Dr. Singhvi

No mention of Section 407 except in the two mails: Dr. Singhvi

Sometimes he says 407, sometimes 226, sometimes 482. It is like Mohammad Ali - "Floats like a Butterfly, sting like a bee": Dr. Singhvi

The same reason pleaded for 407 is mobocracy: Dr. AM Singhvi

Extraordinarily, there is a case of retrospective validation by CBI: Dr. AM Singhvi

All case laws cited are of political persons and political disputes: Acting CJ Rajesh Bindal in a lighter vein

Bench rises. Hearing to resume at 11.45 am tomorrow.