News Desk, Kolkata : In a significant development, Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, a judge in the High Court of the state, has come under scrutiny for his remarks regarding admissions to medical colleges in the state. Advocates, with a plea for clemency, have appealed to the Advocate General (AG) of the state. The controversy stems from Justice Gangopadhyay’s comments on the irregularities in admissions to government medical colleges.
In a letter addressed to the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, T.S. Thakur, advocates expressed their concern over Justice Gangopadhyay’s statements, describing them as “condemnable, derogatory, humiliating, and disrespectful.” The advocates further alleged that the judge’s comments had brought disrepute to the legal fraternity in West Bengal.
The Chief Justice, acknowledging the gravity of the situation, received the letter highlighting the need for clemency on behalf of Justice Gangopadhyay. The advocates emphasized that the judge’s remarks, specifically targeted at AG Gangopadhyay’s intentions, were regrettable and damaging to the reputation of legal professionals in the state.
Adding to the complexity, Justice Gangopadhyay had previously addressed the issue of admission irregularities in government medical colleges on January 25. In the controversial remarks, he stated, “We consider the incident as an insult to the lawyers in West Bengal.” The judge’s assertion that the comments were made in the context of the AG’s objectives in the matter added fuel to the fire, as it was perceived as a direct affront to the legal community.
In a related context, Justice Gangopadhyay had issued directions on January 24 regarding the investigation into the admission irregularities in government medical colleges. However, the following day saw a stay order issued by Division Bench Justice Soumen Sen. Subsequently, on January 25, Justice Sen recused himself from the case, and the FIR filed by the CID was withdrawn from the court.
Following these developments, Justice Gangopadhyay directed an impeachment process against Justice Sen, accusing him of “acting like a person influenced by political motives.” The judge questioned why impeachment proceedings were not initiated against Justice Sen for his alleged misconduct. This move by Justice Gangopadhyay brought attention to the ongoing feud within the judiciary.
The unfolding saga took a dramatic turn as Justice Gangopadhyay expressed dissatisfaction with the conduct of Advocate General Kishore Dutta during the proceedings. This dissatisfaction led to a controversial comment by Justice Gangopadhyay, raising questions about AG Dutta’s intentions concerning AG Gangopadhyay. The judge’s remarks further deepened the animosity within the legal circles of West Bengal.
In the aftermath, calls for impeachment against Justice Sen gained momentum. Advocates argued that his alleged political affiliations compromised the integrity of the judiciary. The demand for impeachment, however, faced resistance, with questions raised about the timing and motivations behind such a move.
As the legal community grapples with internal strife, the larger implications of this controversy loom large. The integrity of the judiciary and the reputation of legal professionals in West Bengal are at stake. The dynamics between judges, advocates, and the government have created a tense atmosphere, requiring careful navigation to restore trust and uphold the principles of justice.
This evolving narrative underscores the need for a comprehensive inquiry into the admission irregularities in government medical colleges while addressing the internal conflicts within the judiciary. The spotlight remains on Justice Gangopadhyay’s remarks, the ensuing impeachment proceedings, and the impact on the legal landscape of West Bengal. The story continues to unfold, with implications reaching beyond the boundaries of the state’s legal system.
DISCLAIMER
Our news media denounces any form of bias and disapproves of sensationalism. The disseminated news is entirely educational and aimed at social awareness. Our media maintains absolute impartiality, adhering solely to the purpose of education and social consciousness.
