‘Are you a post-office?’… ‘Shame for state’: Judge who has captured West Bengal’s imagination

Having graduated with a law degree from the University of Calcutta in 1991, Justice Sinha practised in Kolkata for nearly two decades before being appointed an additional judge of the Calcutta High Court on May 2, 2018. She was elevated as a permanent judge on April 24, 2020.

She first came into the spotlight in July 2021, when she took exception to Visva-Bharati University’s decision of deducting a day’s salary from its employees to donate to the West Bengal Chief Minister’s Relief Fund after the Amphan cyclone of May 2020.

The court observed that the university couldn’t do so without the consent of the employees. During the hearing, Justice Sinha said, “Neither does the employer have the power nor the authority to unilaterally deduct salary or any portion thereof, of an employee, in the garb of donation. A person cannot be forced to donate. The moment force is applied, the act of the donor does not remain voluntary. It amounts to forcible deduction, which is grossly different from the term ‘donation’.”

In April 2023, the Supreme Court ordered two cases related to the school job recruitment scam to be shifted from the Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay. A month later, the then acting Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, T S Sivagnanam, assigned the cases to Justice Sinha.

Later, she also began hearing cases relating to the violence during the panchayat polls in June.

Around six months ago, the Calcutta High Court began live-streaming hearings, leaving the final decision on whether to go live to the discretion of individual judges. Justice Sinha was among those who did so. Given the cases with her, her popularity soon skyrocketed.

During a hearing of the school job scam case September 29, she lashed out at ED officer Mithilesh Kumar Mishra, after he submitted property details of the Lok Sabha MP under probe — TMC No. 2 Abhishek Banerjee — which she observed were understated. “The document shows that this person has got only three insurance policies, and doesn’t have a bank account. He must have a bank account where his salary gets credited… He is a Member of Parliament… These are not reflected in the report… What type of report have you prepared? Are you a post office? Somebody has forwarded it and you simply printed it out…?” asked Justice Sinha in court.

On a later date, she ordered: “On the last occasion, the court interacted with Shri Mishra, who was unable to provide satisfactory answers to the court’s question. The court is convinced that the said officer will not be competent enough to handle the present case, which is of a huge magnitude… He may be engaged in some other case, but won’t be entrusted to investigate any case arising in the state of West Bengal.”

She added, “You had said the company Leaps and Bounds (allegedly belonging to Abhishek Banerjee) has been engaged in dubious transactions. What (proof) did you have to arrive at that finding?… You (CBI and ED) are the best investigative agencies in the country, with the best minds. Why did the court need to pass an order calling for the list of assets?”

These statements came days after she had ordered the ED to furnish details of bank accounts and properties of Abhishek Banerjee and his family members.

In a case related to the alleged municipality job scam, after the state government challenged the unbiasedness of the CBI and ED, she stated, “Several high ranking officials of the state government involved in the scam are behind bars. The investigating agencies are proceeding to identify the others involved in the crime. The investigation has proceeded to a fair extent.”

Earlier, speaking in a case in connection with the state government giving out allowances to Durga Puja committees, she noted that this was being done “while (other) matters are being moved, concerning pension and salaries not being paid, recruitment not being done, all because want of funds”.

Her observations in cases connected to pre-poll and poll-related violence during the panchayat elections, also created a stir in the state.

In one instance, days before the polls in June, Justice Sinha observed: “The election should be stopped due to the amount of violence that is happening. It is a shame for the state.”

Later, in a case over irregularities in counting for the panchayat election at Jangipara block of Hooghly district, she admonished the BDO and the returning officer, asking, “How could the returning officer begin counting without the presence of the candidate? How were 319 ballots suddenly disqualified during recounting? Is this child’s play? Did the BDO have his eyes closed?”

While several lawyers appreciate Justice Sinha’s unalloyed remarks, senior lawyer Baishwanar Chatterjee says, “In my 33 year’s experience, the court giving its opinion is something new. A court should always give verdicts according to the findings of the investigating agencies. The court can’t direct them. In our system, everybody has a limit and nobody should cross it.”