Kolkata, June 15, 2026
Calcutta High Court’s single‑judge bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharya on Monday recused from hearing the case where Trinamool Congress general secretary and Lok Sabha member Abhishek Banerjee had challenged raids and search operations by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) of West Bengal at two party offices in connection with the CID’s ongoing investigation into the legislators’ signatures mismatch cases.
On June 9, when both Abhishek Banerjee and his aunt, former West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, were in New Delhi to attend a meeting of the opposition Indian National Development Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) bloc, two CID teams conducted simultaneous raids and search operations at two Trinamool offices in connection with the case of mismatches in the signatures of some Trinamool legislators on a crucial resolution about appointments for certain slots in the West Bengal Assembly reserved for the opposition bench.
One of the two party offices where the raids were conducted was adjacent to Mamata Banerjee’s residence on Harish Chatterjee Street in South Kolkata, while the other was on Camac Street in central Kolkata, where Abhishek Banerjee used to operate.
A petition was filed at the single‑judge vacation bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharya against those raids and search operations. However, on Monday, Justice Bhattacharya recused from hearing the matter.
The judge observed that since Abhishek Banerjee had already filed a separate petition challenging the FIR filed against him by the CID in the legislators’ signatures mismatch case before another single‑judge bench of the same court, he would not hear a matter related to the same case.
Justice Bhattacharya said that since the verdicts of two single‑judge benches in the same case could be contrary to each other, he would prefer to recuse. He also observed that the petition challenging the CID raids at the two Trinamool offices should be heard at the single‑judge bench of Justice Kaushik Chanda, where Abhishek Banerjee’s petition challenging the FIR by the CID against him is being heard.(Agency)
FOLLOW NOW
