|
West Bengal officials including senior police officials on Monday did not appear before the Lok Sabha Privileges Committee over the complaint of BJP MP Sukanta Majumdar. The Supreme Court had earlier in the day stayed the Privileges Committee proceedings against West Bengal senior officials in the matter relating to the Sandeshkhali protest.
West Bengal Chief Secretary, Director General of Police/inspector-general of police, SP Basirhat, and Addl SP Basirhat were asked to appear before the Lok Sabha panel on February 19 for "oral evidence into the breach of privilege and violation of protocol norms." The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to concerned respondents and also stayed the Lok Sabha Committee proceedings against West Bengal senior officials. Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for WB's senior officials, mentioned the plea before a bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and apprised them of the facts related to the matter. The plea was filed by WB's Chief Secretary Bhagwati Prasad Gopalika, Director General and Inspector General of Police Rajeev Kumar, North 24 Parganas's District Magistrate, Basirhat's Superintendent of Police, and Additional SP through advocate on record Astha Sharma. The Privileges Committee notice came on a complaint filed by Majumdar for alleged misconduct, brutality, and causing "life-threatening injuries" by the police officials and district administration of Basirhat, North 24 Parganas District of West Bengal. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal submitted before the Supreme Court that the BJP MP had gone to Sandeshkhali and violated Section 144 CrPC. He also said that political activities can't be part of privilege. An advocate appearing for the LS Secretariat told the court that only a notice has been issued and they aren't called as accused in the matter but just to ascertain facts. The petition said that senior officials were constrained to file the present petition due to the extremely urgent situation that arose upon issuance of the Memorandums, directing them to appear before the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges for oral evidence on February 19, based on a mere complaint, which, prima facie, does not disclose any breach of Parliamentary privilege guaranteed to a BJP MP. The petitioner said that the action is wholly without jurisdiction, illegal, unwarranted, contrary to the law, and unconstitutional. The petitioners said that being senior officials of the state, they would have to leave their public duties and appear before the Committee of Privilege, which "is unwarranted and unjustified". (ANI)
|
