Mamata’s Intimidatory Tactics For Pliant Judiciary Succeeds: Justice Chanda Pained With Calumnious Attack, Recuses Himself From Nandigram Poll Case; Imposes Rs 5 Lakh Fine On Mamata
There is complete silence from the mainstream media propagandist-journalists and the self-styled legal activists against the rabid intimidation and bull-dozing of judiciary by Mamata Banerjee for ensuring desired results in cases against TMC and Mamata Banerjee.
Mamata Wants A Pliant Judiciary After Subduing Police & Bureaucracy
The TMC and Mamata Banerjee herself through her counsel had raised calumnious accusations against Justice Kausik Chanda of the Calcutta High Court to recuse from the election petition filed by Mamata Banerjee challenging the victory of BJP’s Suvendu Adhikari from Nandigram Assembly Constituency.
Pained with the scandalous accusations made against him, Justice Kausik Chanda on Wednesday reportedly recused himself from CM Mamata Banerjee’s case on Nandigram polls.
Notably, TMC MLA advocate Ashok Kumar Deb misused his position as West Bengal Bar council chief by using a Bar Council letterhead for a personal politically motivated letter to the Chief Justice of India, NV Ramana seeking the removal of Justice Rajesh Bindal as the Acting Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court by making scandalous allegations of bias against him in the Narada case.
The TMC ran a concerted campaign in social media platforms against the two judges of the Calcutta High Court along with the help of celebrity fellow travellers in the media and legal domain.
Mamata Banerjee’s counsel made baseless accusations against Justice Chanda of being biased in favour of the BJP, claiming that he had represented the BJP in some cases as a counsel in the past as a professional lawyer. These arguments are highly mischievous to say the least, as every judge of the Supreme Court and High Courts has before being appointed as a Judge represented some party or the other as a counsel and a maximum of them have been even closely associated with Congress leaders.
Several of the judges have served Congress governments as law officers as senior lawyers and professionals or even been associated with leftist parties. Their past associations was never held against them in their role as a judge to be unbiased and objective in cases before them.
So, this sudden attack on Justice Chanda leaves no doubt in the mind that Mamata wishes cases to be filed before Judges of her personal choice whom she perceives would be favourably disposed towards her rather than be objective while deciding cases. This also raises problematic issues like ostracising people, like a Ghazi Firman, for having any professional relationship with the BJP or the Sangh Parivar.
Justice Kausik Chanda Lambasts Mamata’s Recusal Demand As Calculative Attempt to Psychologically Over Awe The Judge
Justice Kausik Chanda condemned the manner in which Mamata Banerjee sought his recusal and imposed a fine of Rs. 5 lakh on her for her scurrilous accusations against him. Justice Chanda refuted accusations of bias and conflict of interest and recused from Banerjee’s election petition. Justice Chanda while recusing stated that another bench will now hear the case.
Justice Chanda stated that,“I am unable to convince myself that there is a conflict of interest. The applicant has taken too somber a view of integrity of a Judge. I have however decided to recuse myself from this case. Such calculative, psychological and offensive attempt to seek recusal need to be firmly repulsed and a cost of Rs. 5 lakh is imposed upon Petitioner,” said Justice Chanda.
Justice Chanda pointed out that such dark views on integrity of a Judge was made by Banerjee with a calculated move desiring to have a psychological effect which was offensive and needed to be repulsed. He imposed a fine of Rs.5 lakhs on Mamata Banerjee for attempting to over awe the judiciary.
BJP & Sangh Parivar Clueless In Dealing With Anti-Hindu Lobby’s Muscle Flexing In Judicial System
This case also brings to fore the complete cluelessness of the BJP to deal with calumny and illegal arm twisting attempts of the Trinamool Congress and Mamata Banerjee to get a pliant judiciary after having managed a slavish bureaucratic administration and equally obsequious police in West Bengal. The BJP and Hindu organisations has no idea how to protect their cadres from getting butchered and raped in Bengal under Mamata Banerjee.
The BJP and the Sangh Parviar other than being keyboard warriors did not even try to raise their voice against the naked intimidatory tactics of the TMC and Mamata Banerjee to over awe the judiciary trying to extort favourable verdicts for Narada scam, election petitions and murderous brutal post-poll violence unleashed by the TMC.
It is foolhardiness to expect a compromised media infested with people like Rajdeep Sardesai or a Sagarika Ghose or a Barkha Dutt to call out violence against Hindus & BJP cadre in Bengal or the open attempt at steam-rolling the judiciary by the TMC and Mamatas Banerjee to do their bidding. Such intimidatory tactics of the TMC and the Congress (in Judge Loya death case) bears fruit as there is no cogent protest and push back legally, politically and socially by the BJP and Hindu organisations like the anti-Hindu lobby.
It is important to remember only a baby which cries the most gets more milk and a baby is neglected or denied milk if it lays quietly without any demands when the resources are scarce. Such is the nature of the world. The BJP and its sister organisations needs to gear up and protest against targeting of unbiased Judges by the ant-Hindu cabal and call out strange recusals by Supreme Court Judges from Bengal in hearing cases against Mamata Banerjee.
Unless this is done, the BJP and the Hindu organisations will soon find itself in footnotes of history. There are no free lunches in the world, the BJP and the Sangh echelons have to take their share of risks to confront a mafia which wants to annihilate it and not leave their cadre to the mercy of blood thirsty political and religious Draculas.
Image sourced from Republic World.
Further readings:
DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text.
