Should protection from registration of FIRs granted to Suvendu Adhikari remain? Supreme Court asks Calcutta High Court CJ to decide

The Supreme Court on Friday directed the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to decide whether a High Court order restraining the filing of criminal cases for two years against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Suvendu Adhikari should continue..A Bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra passed the order in an appeal by Adhikari challenging a July 20 order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court, which had effectively vacated the stay on the lodging of first information reports (FIRs) against him. .Adhikari claimed that the July 20 order was passed before he was properly heard on the matter. .In view of this submission, the top court passed the following directions: We request Calcutta High Court Chief Justice to hear the writ petition of July 20 afresh;The July 20 order of Calcutta High Court stands set aside; The Chief Justice court shall be at liberty to pass orders in all pending proceedings after hearing the petitioner both on merits and maintainability;High Court shall not be trammeled by the September and December 2021 orders passed..Senior Advocate PS Patwalia appeared for Adhikari today and argued that he had earlier informed the High Court that the bench assigned for handling PILs was not active.Despite this, judge hesitantly scheduled the case to be heard on July 20."It was listed before the Chief Justice bench at serial number 13...the Chief Justice was not sitting...there was a notice for this...the petition was drafted on July 18 when they knew the Chief Justice would not be holding court for two days," he added.Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, appearing for one Soumen Nandy, took exception to this submission, stating that allegations were being made by Patwalia against a High Court judge."He is making allegations against a judge who is a man of great integrity...he is making on these allegations without having the courage to say all this on record...he dare not," Gupta argued.Once an FIR is registered the damage is done, Patwalia, contended further. He asserted the Supreme Court itself had asked the State to go back to the same High Court judge, when it came before the top court to register an FIR..The Bench today ultimately opined that it need not express any view on the submissions made at this stage.It would suffice to note that the July 20 order was passed without allowing Adhikari the opportunity to contest the maintainability of the plea or to file his objections, CJI Chandrachud observed before passing today's order remitting the matter back to the High Court..West Bengal Leader of Opposition Adhikari had moved the instant plea against a Calcutta High Court order that had paved the way for the registration of a criminal complaint against him for allegedly promoting enmity in his panchayat election speeches.In a July 20 order, the Calcutta High Court had directed the West Bengal Police to consider a public interest litigation (PIL) before the Court as a complaint.A Division Bench of Justices IP Mukerji and Biswaroop Chowdhury had asked the police to examine if any case under Section 153A (promoting enmity between different groups) of the Indian Penal Code was made out against Adhikari, and to register an FIR against the BJP leader.Pertinently, that Bench had observed that earlier orders passed by Justice Rajasekhar Mantha restraining filing of FIRs against Adhikari were being misread..In his appeal, Adhikari stressed that since his election win on a BJP ticket, he has faced a barrage of criminal cases based on false complaints.The interim High Court order under challenge was passed without hearing him or letting him file a reply, he contended.Adhikari, therefore, sought an ex-parte ad-interim stay of the High Court's order..[Read live coverage of the hearing]