Controversial Arrest Order by Calcutta High Court Judge Sparks Legal Uproar

Bar association boycotts proceedings involving Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay after arrest order on contempt charges

A recent order by Calcutta High Court Judge Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay to arrest a lawyer from the courtroom on contempt charges has ignited a major controversy. The bar association, in response, has declared a boycott of proceedings involving Justice Gangopadhyay, intensifying the legal uproar.

Background

Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, who had earlier faced criticism from the Supreme Court for giving interviews on a matter he was hearing, issued an arrest order for Advocate Prosenjit Mukherjee during a hearing related to the West Bengal Madrasah Service Commission.

Courtroom Conduct Dispute

Reports suggest that Justice Gangopadhyay was displeased with the lawyer’s conduct in the courtroom and promptly called for the lawyer’s arrest on contempt charges, disregarding the lawyer’s apology.

Release and Fear of Rearrest

Following requests from some lawyers, Justice Gangopadhyay withdrew the arrest order, and the advocate was released. However, in a subsequent hearing, the advocate expressed fear of potential rearrest, leading to a three-day pause on the imprisonment order by a division bench.

Judicial Restraint Emphasized

The division bench, comprising Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya, emphasized the importance of judicial restraint and discipline in maintaining the purity of the administration of justice. The bench stressed that judges should exercise humility and constant restraint.

Bar Association’s Response

The bar association has requested Calcutta High Court Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam to withdraw all judicial work from Justice Gangopadhyay. The association asserts that no member will enter Justice Gangopadhyay’s court until he apologizes to Advocate Mukherjee and the bar.

Supreme Court’s Earlier Rebuke

Justice Gangopadhyay had faced criticism from the Supreme Court earlier this year for giving a TV interview on a matter he was hearing, leading to the reassignment of the case to a different judge. The judge’s request for documents related to his removal from the case was put on hold by the Supreme Court.

The controversial arrest order and subsequent legal developments have heightened tensions, with the bar association taking a strong stance against Justice Gangopadhyay. The implications of this episode on judicial decorum and the ongoing legal proceedings remain to be seen.