The ongoing controversy surrounding the fake caste certificate case in West Bengal has reached the Supreme Court, with a five-judge bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, scheduled to hear the case. The Supreme Court took suo moto cognizance of the matter, titled “In Re: Orders of Calcutta High Court dated 24.01.2024 AND 25.01.2024 and Ancillary Issues,” arising from conflicting orders by a single-judge bench and a division bench of the Calcutta High Court.
Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay of the Calcutta High Court accused Justice Soumen Sen, who heads the division bench, of acting in favor of a political party in West Bengal. The controversy emerged when Justice Gangopadhyay’s single-judge bench directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the fake caste certificate matter, bypassing the division bench’s order.
The fake caste certificates scam came to light after a petition alleged the issuance of fake caste certificates to employees to facilitate their admission to medical courses. On January 24, Justice Gangopadhyay’s single-judge bench instructed the West Bengal Police to hand over related documents to the CBI. However, this order was stayed by the division bench led by Justice Sen and Uday Kumar.
The matter was revisited by Justice Gangopadhyay’s single-judge bench, which once again directed the state police to provide the documents to the CBI. However, the division bench on Thursday did not allow the order to be approved. In response, the single-judge bench passed remarks against Justice Sen, accusing him of acting for a political party in West Bengal and engaging in misconduct.
The Supreme Court’s intervention comes as a significant development, with a five-judge bench set to examine the conflicting orders and the alleged misconduct by Justice Sen. The bench, comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant, and Aniruddha Bose, will delve into the legal intricacies of the case.
The controversy has raised concerns about the functioning of the judiciary, with the Supreme Court taking a proactive stance to address the issues. The outcome of the Supreme Court’s hearing could have far-reaching implications, not only for the specific case but also for the broader understanding of judicial conduct and the resolution of conflicts within the legal system.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the case, legal experts and observers will closely watch the proceedings, looking for insights into the judiciary’s role in ensuring justice, maintaining integrity, and upholding the rule of law. The outcome of this hearing could shape future perceptions of the judiciary’s ability to address internal conflicts and maintain public confidence in the legal system.
