Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |     Invalid Bank Guarantee Invocation Found Fatal to Recovery Claim: Delhi High Court Dismisses GAIL’s Appeal    |     Adverse Remarks in APAR Recorded Without Objectivity and Likely Motivated by Bias: Delhi High Court Quashes Biased APAR Downgrade of CRPF Officer    |    

High Court Rejects Bail in Major Teacher Recruitment Scam: Gravity of Offence and Influential Position of Accused Necessitates Continued Custody

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Calcutta High Court rejected the bail application of Sri Manik Bhattacharya, in connection with the money laundering case arising out of ECIR No. KLZOII/19/2022. The Hon’ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh, presiding over the case, underscored the seriousness of the allegations and the influential position of the accused in his decision to deny bail.

Justice Ghosh noted, “The gravity of the offence as also the stage of the investigation which is at the final stage, I am of the view that this is not a fit case for the petitioner to be released on bail at this stage.” This statement came as the court considered various aspects of the case, including the petitioner’s role as the former President of the West Bengal Board of Primary Education and the ongoing investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

The case, which has garnered significant attention, involves allegations of money laundering in the recruitment of primary teachers. The ED’s investigation brought forth incriminating materials recovered from Bhattacharya’s premises, indicating his possible involvement in the recruitment scam.

The court also referred to several key judgments by the Supreme Court highlighting the seriousness of economic offences. “The severity of punishment upon conviction, potential impact on the investigation, and the seriousness of economic offenses,” were pivotal factors in the court’s decision, as Justice Ghosh reiterated the need for a stringent approach in such cases.

The timeline for the investigation has been set, with the High Court directing its conclusion by December 31, 2023. This tight schedule underscores the complexity and the high stakes of the case.

Legal experts following the case have noted the court’s emphasis on the accused’s influential position and the potential impact his release could have on the investigation. The decision is seen as a strong message against economic offences and a reaffirmation of the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the law in high-profile cases.

Representing the petitioner, a team of advocates led by Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Sr. Adv., argued for bail, citing a lack of direct evidence against Bhattacharya. However, the ED’s legal team, including Mr. Phiroze Edulji, Adv., and Ms. Anamika Pandey, Adv., successfully countered these arguments, highlighting the ongoing nature of the investigation and the substantial evidence gathered so far.

Date of Decision: 16 NOV 2023

Sri Manik Bhattacharya    versus     Enforcement Directorate 

 

Similar News