March 27, 2023

Mamata Banerjee contested, and misplaced, the April-May election from the Nandigram seat (File)


Mamata Banerjee has written to the Calcutta High Court to ask that her petition difficult the election of the BJP’s Suvendu Adhikari from Nandigram be re-assigned to a unique decide.

The case is at present assigned to Justice Kaushik Chanda.

In a letter written on behalf of the Chief Minister by her advocate, and delivered to the Chief Justice on June 16, Ms Banerjee outlined two causes for the request.

One is that there are stories Justice Chanda was related to the BJP prior to now, and Ms Banerjee stated there’s “reasonable apprehension of bias… in favour of the Respondent…”.

The respondent on this petition is Mr Adhikari.

Ms Banerjee additionally stated she “reasonably apprehends likelihood of bias” as a result of in April she had objected to Justice Chanda’s affirmation as a everlasting decide of the Calcutta High Court.

“… it will lead to a situation and perception whereby the Honourable Judge, in adjudicating the matter, may be said to be ‘judge in his own cause’,” the Chief Minister wrote.

“Justice must not only be done; it must also be seen to be done,” she added, as she underlined the necessity to “sustain the confidence of the public in the judiciary”.

Earlier at present Trinamool Congress MP Derek O’Brien tweeted two images that appeared to point out Justice Chanda at a gathering of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s Law & Legal Affairs Department.

“Who is that person ‘circled’ in both pics? Is he Justice Kaushik Chanda of Calcutta High Court? Has he been assigned to hear the Nandigram election case? Can the judiciary sink any lower?” he stated.

The Trinamool’s spokesperson, Kunal Ghosh, steered Justice Chanda “likely may have a soft spot for (the BJP) unconsciously” and stated “perhaps he should leave this case”.

Ms Banerjee’s petition was briefly heard this morning by Justice Chanda and adjourned to June 24.

Sources stated that in instances associated to the Representation of the People Act the petitioner – on this case Ms Banerjee – is required to be current in courtroom. Otherwise, the courtroom might dismiss the plea.

Mamata Banerjee was not current in courtroom at present and it’s not clear if she shall be subsequent week.

Ms Banerjee had moved the courtroom to problem the results of the election from Nandigram; she’d contested the seat towards protege-turned-rival Suvendu Adhikari and misplaced by lower than 2,000 votes.

She requested for Mr Adhikari’s election be declared void on fee of corrupt practices together with bribery, promotion of hatred and enmity, searching for of votes on the idea of faith.

In addition, this night 4 different Trinamool leaders who had misplaced their electoral races additionally filed petitions. These 4 are: Shantiram Mahato (from Balarampur), Alorani Sarkar (from Moyna), Manas Majumdar (from Goghat) and Ashok Dinda (from) Bongaon Dakshin.

In Shantiram Mahato’s case the courtroom has handed an order.

In view of those instances the High Court has stated that every one poll-related paperwork have to be saved intact.

May 2 – the day of counting of votes, which went on until midnight – noticed a number of twists and turns.

Ms Banerjee trailed Mr Adhikari for 11 rounds however the pattern modified within the subsequent 4, with margins starting from six to 11,000. Mr Adhikari gained within the closing rounds and was declared winner.

Indicating potential irregularities, the Chief Minster alleged the following day servers had been down for 4 hours through the counting. She additionally claimed the election officer had been threatened.

Ms Banerjee had stated she accepted the decision of the individuals, however she additionally stated she would go to the Supreme Court over the way in which the Election Commission had carried out the polls.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *