Supreme Court Deliberates on Partha Chatterjee's Bail Request in West Bengal Job Scam

New Delhi, Dec 4 (NationPress) The Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved its ruling on the bail request of former West Bengal Education Minister Partha Chatterjee related to the money laundering case associated with the purported cash-for-school-job scam.

A bench led by Justice Surya Kant reserved its decision after hearing arguments from senior advocate Mukul Rohtagi, who represented Chatterjee, and Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju, who stood for the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Rohtagi argued that the former minister had been in custody for more than two years and that the trial's conclusion was not imminent. He also pointed out that other co-accused had received bail in this money laundering case.

In response, the Justice Kant-led bench remarked, “You cannot claim parity here. Not everyone was a minister.” The bench noted that proceeds of crime totaling Rs 28 crore had been confiscated from Chatterjee's industrial premises.

When Rohtagi disputed the claim of recovery, asserting that the property did not belong to Chatterjee, Justice Kant interjected, stating, “On the face of it, you appear to be a corrupt individual! What message do you intend to send to society? That corrupt individuals can secure bail so easily?”

The bench further stated: “This was uncovered after judicial intervention and a central agency investigation. The amount recovered is not something people typically keep at home. Our primary concern is whether your release will affect the trial or intimidate witnesses.”

Opposing the bail petition, the ED argued that Chatterjee would likely attempt to influence witnesses and tamper with evidence if released.

During a previous hearing, the bench, which also included Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, suggested the possibility of granting relief to Chatterjee and expressed concerns about the delay in starting the trial.

Questioning the ED, Justice Kant asked, “How long can we keep him in custody? This is a situation where more than two years have lapsed. If he is ultimately found not guilty, what then?”

The bench also raised the issue of the low conviction rate in cases filed by the ED under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

In its response, the ED reiterated that serious corruption allegations against Chatterjee were related to job offers made to unqualified candidates in exchange for bribes.

The federal anti-money laundering agency emphasized that Chatterjee remained in custody for corruption-related charges and would potentially influence witnesses to retract their statements if granted bail.

Chatterjee’s counsel had previously expressed skepticism about the timing of the arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), noting that the former minister was detained two years after the FIR was registered, during the pending adjudication of his bail petition in the ED case before the Supreme Court.

The apex court, on October 1, issued a notice to the ED, instructing the agency to reply within two weeks.

Previously, the Calcutta High Court had denied Chatterjee’s bail request. After being denied bail multiple times in lower courts, Chatterjee appealed to the high court, asserting he had no connection to the substantial cash found at the residence of his close associate, Arpita Mukherjee, and deserved bail. The ED had seized large amounts of cash and gold from Mukherjee's residences in July 2022, which Mukherjee alleged were stored there by Chatterjee.

During the investigation, the ED also seized various properties, including land and residential houses that were indirectly or jointly owned by the Trinamool Congress leader and his close associates and relatives.

Chatterjee was arrested at his home by the ED in July 2022. Since then, after the initial period of central agency custody, he has been held at the Presidency Central Correctional Home in south Kolkata.

Two weeks ago, the Calcutta High Court issued a split verdict on Chatterjee’s bail plea in the corruption case filed by the CBI concerning the same alleged multi-crore cash-for-school-job scam. While Justice Arijit Bandopadhyay ruled in favor of bail for Chatterjee and eight other accused, Justice Apurba Sinha Roy denied bail for Chatterjee and four others. Nevertheless, the bail requests for four individuals were accepted by both Justices Bandopadhyay and Sinha Roy.

The division bench instructed the matter to be presented before Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam. Subsequently, it was announced that a single-judge bench led by Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty would review the case, including Chatterjee’s bail plea.