Supreme Court Grants Conditional Bail to Former Minister in Bengal Recruitment Scam Case

The Supreme Court of India, in Partha Chatterjee vs. Directorate of Enforcement, granted conditional bail to the former West Bengal minister, who had been in judicial custody since August 5, 2022, in connection with the multi-crore Bengal Teachers’ Recruitment Scam. The judgment, delivered by Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, emphasized the balance between prolonged incarceration and fair trial rights, directing that the petitioner be released on bail under strict conditions after crucial witnesses are examined.

Background of the Case

The case revolves around allegations of corruption in the West Bengal Board of Primary Education, where illegal appointments were allegedly made for the posts of Primary Teachers, Assistant Teachers, Group C, and Group D staff. The recruitment scam came to light when multiple writ petitions were filed by unsuccessful candidates alleging corruption in the Teachers’ Eligibility Test (TET).

The Calcutta High Court, on June 8, 2022, directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe the allegations. Consequently, the CBI registered an FIR against several officials, including Chatterjee, under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) also took cognizance and, on July 23, 2022, arrested the petitioner under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). Searches at his premises led to the seizure of:

Cash amounting to Rs. 21.90 crores from the residence of his close associate.
Additional Rs. 27.90 crores and gold worth Rs. 4.31 crores from properties linked to Chatterjee.
Documents related to illegal appointments in the education sector.

Legal Issues Considered

Does the prolonged incarceration of the accused violate fundamental rights?
Should bail be granted despite the seriousness of the allegations?
Does the accused pose a flight risk or threat to witnesses?
What safeguards should be imposed to prevent tampering with evidence?

Arguments by the Petitioner (Partha Chatterjee)

The petitioner, represented by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, contended:

He had been in custody for over two years without trial commencement.
He was neither named nor charge-sheeted in the predicate offense.
He had no prior criminal record and posed no flight risk.
There was no direct evidence linking him to the seized cash.
Under Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), he had served one-third of the maximum prescribed sentence and was entitled to bail.

Arguments by the Respondent (Directorate of Enforcement)

The ED, represented by Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, countered:

The case involved a massive public employment scam affecting thousands of job aspirants.
Witnesses had testified that Chatterjee orchestrated the scam, using dummy companies to launder money.
The total proceeds of crime exceeded Rs. 151.2 crores.
His close associate, from whose premises the money was recovered, had expressed fear of threat to life if he were released.
Section 479 of BNSS was inapplicable as Chatterjee was not a first-time offender.

Supreme Court’s Observations

On Prolonged Incarceration

The Court recognized:

“Prolonged incarceration of an accused awaiting trial unjustly deprives them of their right to personal liberty. Even statutory embargoes on the grant of bail must yield when weighed against the paramount importance of the right to life and liberty under Article 21.”

On Potential Threat to Witnesses

The Court noted:

“The statement of the co-accused indicating fear for life at the hands of the petitioner necessitates the imposition of stringent conditions before granting bail.”

On Bail Conditions

The Court struck a balance between personal liberty and fair trial by directing:

“The petitioner shall be released on bail only after the key prosecution witnesses have been examined to ensure no interference with the trial.”

Final Verdict

The Supreme Court issued the following directives:

The Trial Court must complete witness examination of key prosecution witnesses before January 31, 2025.
Chatterjee shall be released on bail on February 1, 2025, subject to furnishing bail bonds.
Any attempt to threaten or influence witnesses will result in bail cancellation.
He must attend every hearing and cannot seek unnecessary adjournments.
He shall not hold any public office during the trial, except for continuing as an MLA.

Impact of the Judgment

This ruling has significant implications:

Balances fair trial rights with stringent conditions to prevent witness tampering.
Sets a precedent on prolonged incarceration in economic offenses.
Ensures accountability in large-scale corruption cases.
Restricts political influence by barring the accused from public office.

The judgment marks a critical stance on economic offenses and white-collar crime, ensuring that accused individuals are not indefinitely detained while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.

Petitioner Name: Partha Chatterjee.
Respondent Name: Directorate of Enforcement.
Judgment By: Justice Surya Kant, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan.
Place Of Incident: West Bengal, India.
Judgment Date: 13-12-2024.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: partha-chatterjee-vs-directorate-of-enfor-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-13-12-2024.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Money Laundering Cases
See all petitions in Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Public Interest Litigation
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Judgment by Surya Kant
See all petitions in Judgment by Ujjal Bhuyan
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Stayed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments December 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category