Recruitment Case: SC Seeks ED Response On Partha Chatterjee’s Bail Plea

The Supreme Court has requested a response from the Enforcement Directorate regarding the bail plea of former West Bengal minister Partha Chatterjee, who has been arrested over alleged irregularities in the recruitment of teaching and non-teaching staff in the state’s primary schools.

On October 1, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan issued a notice to the ED, requiring a reply by October 17.

The court also directed that the Special CBI Court, designated as a Special Court under Section 43 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), hear Chatterjee’s bail matter on a day-to-day basis and reach a decision within ten days, followed by a compliance report.

Chatterjee has appealed to the Supreme Court against an April 30 order from the Calcutta High Court, which denied him bail on the grounds that a prima facie case had been established against him under the PMLA. The ED arrested him on July 22, 2022, in connection with the alleged recruitment irregularities in government-sponsored and aided primary schools in West Bengal.

Alongside Chatterjee, his alleged close aide Arpita Mukherjee was also arrested as part of the ED’s investigation into the money trail linked to these illegal recruitments. The agency claims to have recovered Rs 49.80 crore in cash, along with jewellery and gold bars from Mukherjee’s properties, in addition to various documents related to properties and a joint holding company.

Chatterjee’s legal team has argued for his bail, citing the completion of the investigation, his age—over 70 years and multiple health issues. They noted that he has spent more than 21 months in custody. However, the ED’s counsel described him as an influential individual and a sitting MLA who might tamper with evidence or influence witnesses if granted bail.

Following his arrest, Chatterjee was relieved of his ministerial duties by the Mamata Banerjee government, and the Trinamool Congress subsequently removed him from all party positions, including that of secretary general.

The Supreme Court’s involvement adds a crucial layer to the ongoing legal proceedings surrounding this high-profile case.