Nation

Mamata Banerjee’s Election Petition Assigned To New High Court Judge

Mamata Banerjee's Election Petition Assigned To New High Court Judge

Mamata Banerjee’s Election Petition Assigned To New High Court Judge. (FILE)

Kolkata:

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s election petition earlier than the Calcutta High Court difficult BJP chief Suvendu Adhikari’s victory from Nandigram constituency within the meeting elections has been assigned to the bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar, court docket sources near PTI mentioned on Monday.

The matter is prone to be listed earlier than the court docket of Justice Sarkar on Wednesday, the sources mentioned.

Justice Kausik Chanda had on July 7 recused from listening to the Trinamool Congress supremo’s petition difficult the election of Mr Adhikari from Nandigram, and imposed a price of Rs 5 lakh on her for the way during which the recusal was sought.

Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal assigned the matter to the court docket of Justice Sarkar.

Mr Adhikari defeated Banerjee from the Nandigram constituency by 1,956 votes within the meeting election held earlier within the yr.

Releasing the election petition of Banerjee on an software by her for recusal expressing apprehension of bias in opposition to her by his bench, Justice Chanda had mentioned that he was doing so with a purpose to thwart on the outset makes an attempt by trouble-mongers to maintain the controversy alive.

Ms Banerjee’s attorneys had recommended that Justice Chanda ought to recuse himself from the case since he was related to the authorized cell of the BJP earlier than his elevation as a Judge and had appeared in quite a few circumstances on behalf of the mentioned social gathering earlier than the excessive court docket as a lawyer.

Her lawyer had recommended throughout his submissions earlier than the court docket that there’s a battle of curiosity since Justice Chanda had an in depth relationship with the BJP and the petitioner has challenged the election of a BJP candidate.

In its order, the court docket had mentioned that it’s preposterous to recommend {that a} decide having a previous affiliation with a political social gathering as a lawyer shouldn’t obtain a case involving the mentioned political social gathering or any of its members.

Justice Chanda had famous that like every other citizen of the nation, a decide additionally workout routines his voting rights in favour of a political social gathering, however he lays apart his particular person predilection whereas deciding a case.

(This story has not been edited by India07 employees and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)


(THIS STORY HAS NOT BEEN EDITED BY INDIA07 TEAM AND IS AUTO-GENERATED FROM A SYNDICATED FEED.)

Leave a Reply

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

Back to top button

Adblock Detected

Please Deactivate Ad Blocker