Site icon Reveal Inside

Supreme Court to Hear West Bengal’s Case Against CBI Investigation: TMC Leader Santanu Sen Calls It a Victory

Supreme Court to Hear West Bengal’s Case Against CBI Investigation: TMC Leader Santanu Sen Calls It a Victory

Supreme Court to Hear West Bengal’s Case Against CBI Investigation

TMC Leader Santanu Sen Calls It a Victory

On Wednesday, TMC leader Santanu Sen described the Supreme Court’s decision to hear West Bengal’s case against the CBI investigation as a victory for the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled that the West Bengal government’s suit challenging the CBI’s investigation without the state’s consent is maintainable.

Sen criticized the BJP-led central government, claiming that the CBI has become a political tool for the BJP. He noted that West Bengal, along with Tamil Nadu, Telangana, and ten other states, had withdrawn general consent for CBI investigations in 2018. Despite this, the CBI continued to register cases, prompting West Bengal to approach the Supreme Court.

Sen welcomed the Supreme Court’s recognition, calling it a victory for cooperative federalism, parliamentary democracy, and the rights of individual states as outlined in the Indian Constitution.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta stated that the case would proceed based on its merits. The court rejected the Union government’s objections and noted that the case raised a legal issue regarding the CBI’s authority to investigate without state consent under the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act.

The hearing is scheduled for August 13 to frame the issues. West Bengal argued that the CBI’s actions without state consent violated the federal nature of the Centre-State relationship. The Central government countered that the CBI is an independent body and not under its control.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing West Bengal, argued that the CBI cannot investigate cases in the state without general consent. The West Bengal government had withdrawn this consent in November 2018, citing the DSPE Act. The state sought a stay on CBI investigations into post-poll violence cases, arguing that the FIRs filed by the CBI were invalid without state consent.

The Centre maintained that it had no role in the CBI’s investigations and that the CBI’s autonomy allowed it to investigate cases with a pan-India impact or involving Central government employees.

Exit mobile version