[Narada Hearing] "Case should have gone to single-judge:" AG Kishore Dutta; "Country wants to know:" SG Tushar Mehta [Read Full Exchange]

The hearing on Monday in the transfer petition relating to arrest of four senior All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) leaders in the Narada case witnessed heated exchange of words between Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta on one side and West Bengal Advocate General Kishore Dutta and Senior Advocate and TMC MLA, Kalyan Bandhopadhyay on the other. .While Dutta, appearing for State of West Bengal, questioned the jurisdiction of the Bench to hear the matter, SG Mehta, representing the CBI maintained that the State government was attempting to restrict the Court from hearing the case on merits. ."This matter cannot have been heard by Division Bench. Does not have jurisdiction as per Appellate Rules or Letters Patent to hear this matter," said Dutta. "The country wants to know and a Constitutional court cannot throw away the matter on technical grounds," Mehta responded. .At this point, Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandhopadhyay who was appearing for the accused TMC leaders threw his weight behind Dutta."Country also wants to know whether rules of Court can be dispensed with.".Dutta was referring to the Appellate Side Rules of the High Court, which govern the procedure of listing and require that a motion seeking transfer either on the civil or the criminal side, has to be heard by a single-judge.The transfer plea filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the Narada case was first listed before a Division Bench as a writ petition in which an order was passed staying the bail.The transfer petition under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was taken up by a Division Bench of the High Court on May 17 based on an email sent by CBI to the Court and a mentioning made by Additional Solicitor General YJ Dastoor.Later, the matter was referred to the present Bench of 5 judges after the two judges on the Division Bench disagreed on the aspect of interim bail. .When the matter came up before five-judge Bench of Acting Chief Justice (CJ) Rajesh Bindal and Justices IP Mukerji, Harish Tandon, Soumen Sen and Arijit Banerjee, Dutta raised the issue of the correctness of the Division Bench in taking up the matter on May 17. Consequently, it was his contention that the reference of the matter to the 5-judge also stood vitiated. "CBI could not have written such a letter or filed a petition before Division Bench," Dutta said. "This shows that the State does not want this court to go into merits. The state is embarrassed if court goes into the merits," replied Tushar Mehta..Acting CJ Rajesh Bindal told the Advocate General that he cannot dictate terms on how the Court should hear a matter. "I have right to make a prayer. Even if it is a wrong prayer," AG Dutta shot back. .Mehta said that such a stance was not expected of the State government. "I am arguing for the Rules. I am arguing for the procedure this chartered court has fixed," Dutta maintained. The Bench tried to resolve the issue with Justice Harish Tandon suggesting that all issues including the issue of jurisdiction and maintainability can be argued and decided. But the exchange between the lawyers continued. "The State does not want court to look into merits of the case on technical grounds," Mehta maintained. "These are not technical issues, these are legal issues," Dutta said. .Mehta tried to commence his arguments but Dutta interrupted asking the Bench for permission to place the relevant High Court rules relating to jurisdiction of the Division Bench to hear the matter. "This is really frustrating," said Mehta. "You are asking to compartmentalise the issue and are asking us to decide on jurisdiction. So, I am saying let all issues be heard including this issue (of jurisdiction)," Justice Harish Tandon suggested. "Mr. Mehta wants to start on merits. He cannot simply say there is siege in CBI office so matter has to go to Division Bench," Dutta submitted. .Supporting Dutta's arguments, Bandopadhyay said,"We are a product of a chartered High Court. We may not be top graded products of the Supreme Court. But we do know a little bit of law.""Nobody is disputing his capability. He is much senior and knowledgeable," said Tushar Mehta. .Eventually, Mehta was asked to commence arguments but the voluminous pleadings and documents involved added to the confusion as the Bench struggled to locate some documents. .As the lawyers and judges tried to sort it out, SG Tushar Mehta thanked Sabyasachi Mukherjee for helping him locate some papers. This led to a light banter between the lawyers. "I am grateful to you Sabyasachi Mukherjee," Mehta said. "Why (are you) not grateful to me," asked Kalyan Bandhopadhyay."I am extremely grateful to you Mr. Bandhopadhyay," said Mehta. "But please don't arrest me ok," said Bandhopadhyay..On the last date of hearing, the Court had decided to grant interim bail to the four Trinamool Congress (TMC) leaders - Firhad Hakim, Subrata Mukherjee, Madan Mitra and Sovan Chatterjee - who were arrested by the CBI in the Narada case..While doing so, the Court had said that it would look into other issues raised by the CBI, including the contention that there was a breakdown of law and order in the State, vitiating the Special CBI Court proceedings against the TMC leaders..[BREAKING] Narada Case: Calcutta High Court grants interim bail to TMC leaders.The matter will be heard next on Tuesday at 11.30 am. .Read a detailed account of the hearing here.