School Jobs for Cash Scam: Calcutta High Court warns West Bengal Chief Secretary

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday warned of issuing contempt of court proceedings against the West Bengal Chief Secretary, BP Gopalika for failing to decide whether or not to sanction the prosecution of former ministers and public servants booked in the school jobs for cash scam case [Kuntal Ghosh vs Central Bureau of Investigation]..A division bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Gaurang Kanth observed that the Chief Secretary's slow response, despite clear orders by the court, called for contempt proceedings. "You are compelling us to pass a harsh order. It is extremely unfair and perhaps in clear violation of our orders. It is a wilful delay which is being engineered by you. You are only inviting contempt. It is a litigator's strategy," Justice Bagchi told Advocate General Kishore Datta.Datta, who appeared for the Chief Secretary, sought seven more weeks to respond. "What is he (Chief Secretary) going to look into? They (accused) were public servants, there is no doubt. There is an allegation of corruption and a chargesheet is filed. What else will he look into? The roadblock (in the instant case) is the sanction by the State as even the Governor has given sanction," the Court observed, in response. .The Court was hearing bail applications by some of the accused persons when it took note of the Chief Secretary's failure to decide on the point of sanction.AG Datta submitted that the issue of sanction cannot be gone into at the bail stage.The Court, however, explained that the grant or denial of bail is linked to aspects such as the gravity of the alleged offence and delay in trial, which in turn would be connected with whether there is sanction to prosecute all the accused. "In the instant case, the gravity of offence is there. There is a delay in trial and that is attributable to the delay in granting a sanction to prosecute the accused. This doesn't appear to be a general bureaucratic lethargy but it is a method of delaying proceedings and lack of co-operation. What is important for us to see is what factor is hindering the smooth functioning of the administration of justice," the Court pointed out. Further, the Bench underlined that there is a "sense of urgency" in the instant case. Therefore, the Chief Secretary has to take a decision at the earliest, the Court opined."If the Advocate General of the State has been unable to infuse a sense (of urgency) in the highest public servant in the State administration, we are constrained to observe that this has been a wilful effort not only to violate our orders but subvert the administration of criminal justice. The sanctioning authority cannot hold the prosecution to ransom. This is a very serious matter," the Court underscored. The Bench added that it could invoke its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and supervise any pending proceedings. "These are very serious matters. Today, an accused has to be enlarged on bail or not is definitely the matter before us. But while doing this, if it comes to light that a particular authority is trying to subvert justice, we cannot turn a blind eye. We are saddened to observe that this is not an expected stance of a constitutional democracy, which moves on trust," the Court observed. .The Court further noted that there are former ministers and public servants among the accused who have "very close and hidden friends" in the State administration."We will not be surprised if the Chief Secretary refuses to grant sanction. We see that you are too powerful to subvert the administration of justice. This is an institutional conspiracy. A Chief Secretary's pen doesn't rise. Can you imagine the extent of this conspiracy? When you have hidden friends, let the hidden friends ensure your bail. They are trying to ensure it," the Court remarked. The matter will be heard again today.