Calcutta High Court warns lawyer after petitioner says he was forced by "illegal agents" to file case, sign blank papers

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday cautioned a lawyer representing a petitioner who asserted that he had been misled into filing a case after being made to sign blank papers which were subsequently used to file a writ petition. [Tapan Kumar Chakraborty v. The State of West Bengal and Ors].Justice Amrita Sinha also ordered a police inquiry into the matter after interacting with the petitioner, a retired government employee who was personally present in court today. The judge initially indicated that she was inclined to take action against the advocate on record for not verifying the case brief before accepting it."I am going to initiate proceedings against the learned advocate," she orally remarked.However, in the order dictated subsequently, the Court let off the advocate with a warning.“The learned Advocate on Record is cautioned so that this type of practice may not recur in future. Prior to accepting a brief, the Advocate on Record should be satisfied that the petitioner has a good case for proceeding...before the court of law,” the order stated..Before wrapping up the hearing in related cases, the judge orally cautioned the advocate concerned,“And madam, once more you are cautioned. Next time, you will be in trouble, I tell you.”.In an earlier order dated June 21, the Court had recorded that the lawyer had expressed that she was unaware of the petitioner’s stance that he was forced into filing the case by the members of an “illegal gang.”The Court also took on board the lawyer’s submission that she had not met the petitioner personally, and that she had got the papers of the writ petition from an agent of a court clerk..In today’s order, the Court recorded the personal presence of the petitioner and his submission that he did not wish to pursue the case.The Court further noted that a series of petitions have been filed on the same issue, concerning the payment of interest on delayed payments of terminal dues to retired employees of the State.It thus ordered the Hooghly Police to conduct a thorough probe into the allegation that the petitioner had been forced to file his petition in this case.“The petitioner himself has disclosed before this Court that he is not aware of the proceeding. In such a situation, the Court thinks it fit to direct the Superintendent of Police, Hooghly (Rural Commissionerate) to cause an enquiry with regard to the gang that is operating in filing writ petitions seeking interest on delayed payments of terminal dues of State employees,” the order stated..Counsel for the State informed the Bench today that the petitioner’s counsel was a young lawyer who was only a year or two into practice and that others may have misled her into taking up the case..How was confidential information leaked? Court asks.The case also prompted Justice Sinha to express concern that confidential data concerning retired State employees may have been leaked to such agents.In its order, the Court asked the police to take instructions from the treasury officers of the district concerned. It also called for an explanation as to how the details of the retired employees of the State were transmitted to the “agents” responsible for the filing of the petition.A report is to be filed by the next date of hearing, the Court saidThe Court will take up the matter next on August 1..[Read June 21 Order]