Disturbing that government lawyers are not appearing in court of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha: Calcutta High Court

The contempt case initiated against lawyers who blocked Justice Rajasekhar Mantha from entering his courtroom on January 9 took an interesting turn on Wednesday, when a three-judge Bench of the Calcutta High Court expressed concern that none of the government lawyers were now appearing in Justice Mantha's court..A Bench of Justices TS Sivagnanam, IP Mukerji and Chitta Ranjan Dash flagged the issue after having dictated its order for the day. ."One more issue, which is bit disturbing for me, personally. None of the government lawyers are appearing in Court 13 [presided by Justice Mantha]...This is very, very, very, very bad.. Have you included Court 16 also?" Justice Sivagnanam queried. .The judge remarked that this will adversely affect innocent parties who expect to be represented by government counsel."Two things happened - the officers carrying files, they are not high rank officers...half these fellows hold the files upside down...As a result, the innocent will be affected...Let us assume, sir, if they do not appear and court takes an adverse view against the officer, and that fellow was under the fond belief that some government officer will represent him. Why that innocent fellow should suffer?...This will be indirectly obstructing the course of justice leading to another contempt of court proceeding. Never it has been like this," he observed. .The contempt case was initiated after advocates claiming to be members of the legal cell of the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) party blocked the entry of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha to court.The lawyers had staged this protest on allegations that the judge had "protected" BJP's Suvendu Adhikari, who is also the Leader of Opposition (LoP) in West Bengal, by passing an order on December 8, 2022. The said order had stayed over 26 FIRs against Adhikari and directed the State to take the Court's permission before lodging any FIR against him..The Court today hinted that lawyers should not hold any grudges against a judge on account of past differences. In this regard, Justice Sivagnanam referred to the early morning hearing in the Supreme Court yesterday to consider a challenge to the appointment of Justice Victoria Gowri as a Madras High Court Judge, minutes before she was sworn into office. Justice Sivagnanam observed that such challenges have been made before at the Madras High Court. However, once such a judge was sworn into office, s/he would be impartial and hold no prejudices even against such challengers, he said."That [petitions challenging appointments] is not new to my parent High Court [Madras High Court]. Every appointment of Additional Advocate General, Advocate General is called into question. But the moment everything is over, [and] the judge is sworn in, the very same counsel will come and appear...and that the judge does not have any bias, he has got no ill feelings," the judge remarked. .The Bench added that if a directive has come from higher-ups that government counsel should not appear in Court 13, a circular should be issued so that parties are aware and could engage their own lawyer. The Court also pointed out that there is a panel constituted by the Legal Services Authority from which lawyers may be engaged by such parties. .This led certain lawyers to raise concern that when it came to panel lawyers, there were political considerations at play. Panel lawyers may also not want to appear in court fearing that their name would be struck off from the panel, the Bench was told. .Before winding up the hearing, Justice Sivagnanam also reminded that young lawyers may suffer if work is withdrawn from them in this manner. "Sir, young members of the Bar suffer...[during COVID]...people [were] virtually crying. They had some quasi-government panel [work] etc...the money was not coming through, no filing...Virtually they were on the streets. This may not affect lawyers with 10-15 years standing, who have a big set of solicitors briefing them, etc. But there is a dark side to it...Probably they appear to be well-dressed, that's why we have got a black coat and gown. Who is crying inside, nobody knows," he remarked. .The contempt case against the protesting lawyers will be heard next on March 15. .Notice issued to six alleged contemnors; Bar Associations to help identify others from CCTV videos.In today's order, the Court directed that CCTV footage of the protesting lawyers be shared with the Bar Council of India (BCI), the Bar Council of West Bengal, the High Court Bar Association, the Bar Library Club, and the Incorporated Law Society, so that the lawyers seen in the video could be identified..During the hearing, the Bench assured that the exercise was only to identify the lawyers and not to ascribe any blame on them right away. All "alleged contemnors" impleaded would be heard before deciding the matter, the Court said.The Bench also suggested that the lawyers may voluntarily inform the Court or the Committee tasked to look into the matter if they are seen in the CCTV footage. The Court issued notice to six lawyers whose names were mentioned in a police report filed in the matter. It also gave further time to the police to submit its report on the printer shops used to print posters of Justice Mantha that were affixed around the High Court and the judge's residence. All the same, the Court has expressed dissatisfaction with the police probe so far, observing, "Had investigation been more vigorous, by now the miscreants would have been identified."The judges also made it clear that while they did not wish to prolong the case, the issue must be dealt with seriously since a sitting judge has been targeted..[Read Order].[Read live coverage of the hearing]