CBI cannot function independently, invoked as tool to persecute State govt officials: West Bengal to Supreme Court in post-poll violence appeal

In its appeal challenging the Calcutta High Court order directing a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the post-poll violence cases in the State, the West Bengal government has told the Supreme Court the agency cannot function independently..The petition states,"Past experience in the State has shown that the CBI cannot function independently and is often invoked as a tool to persecute officials of the State Government, public servants, and representatives of the people in the state. An honest and impartial investigation cannot be expected from the CBI especially in the context of the State of West Bengal. It is not out of place to mention that CBI has been chastised by different High Courts across states for its evident lack of independence and has been rightly described as a “caged parrot”.".The State has also submitted that the agency’s “track record in filing timely charge sheet and achieving convictions is woefully poor.”In this regard, reference is made to the Supreme Court order related to pending CBI and Enforcement Directorate (ED) cases against Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) to highlight how CBI cannot probe a case "in a timely manner.".[BREAKING] West Bengal government moves Supreme Court against Calcutta HC order directing CBI probe into post-poll violence cases.It is also argued that the High Court's direction transferring cases to the CBI was not in accordance with the principles laid down by the Supreme Court..Alleged bias of NHRC appointed committee.The West Bengal government has further submitted that the committee appointed by National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) chairperson Justice (Retd) Arun Mishra to probe the alleged cases of post-poll violence in the State was "biased." The report submitted by this committee was the basis for the High Court decision to transfer serious offence cases to the CBI.It is stated that the committee members were “either members of the Bhartiya Janata Party or known to be closely associated with it.”The opinion of Justice Soumen Sen in the High Court order is cited in this regard. The judge had noted that the inclusion of two members on the committee "could have been avoided as it might raise reasonable likelihood of bias."."Post-poll violence" not defined.The appeal states that the High Court order does not define post-poll violence and has left the issue to be decided by CBI, showing "non-application of mind."The plea cites Justice Sen's separate opinion that the expression “post poll violence” must “refer only to those incidents that taken place in the immediate aftermath of the election results and the complaints must have a direct nexus to the election results.”Justice Sen further agreed with the appellant that there must be “temporal and spatial limits imposed while taking note of complaint and it cannot be open-ended."However, "this reasonable and logical yardstick of what constitutes “post-poll violence” was not accepted by the Majority Bench in the Impugned Order and innumerable unrelated cases were brought within the rubric of post-poll violence cases," reads the appeal..Misleading allegations of low arrest rate by State Police.The State has taken exception to the claim that the State Police has made arrests in only 3% of the cases so far. "The data submitted by the Petitioner State in its Exception with respect to 1429 cases initiated by it will show that there are total 8852 accused; Number of arrests/ persons surrendered/ enlarged on bail is 5154; Notices served under Section 41A Cr.P.C are 2989. Hence, the percentages of arrests/ persons surrendered/ enlarged on bail comes to approximately 58% and not less than 3% as contented by the Committee.".The State has also pointed out the lack of justification to form a five-judge Bench or the abrupt reassignment of PIL’s to a Division Bench."No reasons were provided as to why a Division Bench was not competent to hear the PILs and constitution of a Special Bench was necessitated," reads the appeal..The other grounds raised in the appeal include the fact that the complainants did not approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154 (3) CrPC, discrepancies in the report of the NHRC committee, disregard of the provisions of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 by the committee, and more..The petition has been filed through PLR Chambers & Co.."All cases as per report of NHRC committee where allegations are about murder of person or crime against women regarding rape or attempt to rape shall be referred to CBI for investigation," the High Court had directed in its August 19 order..The High Court had also referred all other cases to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) for a court-monitored probe.The SIT will comprise three IPS officers of West Bengal cadre - Suman Bala Sahoo, Soumen Mitra and Ranvir Kumar.The working of the SIT will be reviewed by a retired judge of the Supreme Court on which a separate order will be passed later after taking the consent of the concerned judge, the Court had said.The Court had also directed all agencies of the State to cooperate with the CBI and SIT for the probe..The Mamata Banerjee-led government had moved the Supreme Court last night challenging the High Court order.The plea by the West Bengal government challenging this order is yet to be numbered by the Supreme Court Registry..[BREAKING] West Bengal government moves Supreme Court against Calcutta HC order directing CBI probe into post-poll violence cases