Traffic ‘maintained very well,' Calcutta HC praises Kolkata police on Shaheed Diwas rally day
Justice Tirthankar Ghosh observed, 'The roads have been maintained very well. I always say that I have full faith in the Kolkata police,' while giving the police a certificate.
A lawyer from New Alipore agreed, claiming that he had reached the court from his residence at the same time as on other days in his car.
At the same time, the Justice expressed his disappointment on seeing the absence of lawyers in the courtroom. On Monday, the Bar Association had appealed to the Chief Justice not to give any verdict in a case if one of the parties does not appear. Referring to that issue, the Justice observed, 'The court's work cannot proceed like this. I do not believe that the road conditions are not such today that we cannot reach the court by 10:30 am. You are spoiling the work atmosphere.'
The court on Friday had directed that all processions heading to the TMC's rally at Central Kolkata's Dharmatala on July 21 must reach the venue by 8 am or after 11 am to ensure the smooth flow of traffic through Central Kolkata during rush hours.
'From 9 am to 11 am, the police authorities would ensure that there is no traffic congestion through the routes which lead to the High Court at Calcutta or within a fringe of 5 km where offices are situated at the Central Kolkata… Commissioner of Police, Kolkata would ensure that deployment of police force be adequately maintained to ensure smooth traffic movement,' said the court's order.
Justice Tirthankar Ghosh, on Thursday in a verbal observation, had urged the TMC to choose a different venue for the Martyrs' Day rally from next year, such as Shahid Minar, the Brigade Parade Ground, or the Salt Lake Stadium. The court had been hearing a petition filed by a group of lawyers alleging potential inconvenience to commuters due to the rally.
The annual Shaheed Diwas or Martyrs' Day rally commemorates the death of 13 Youth Congress workers in 1993 after the police resorted to lathi-charge and opened fire at protesters, demanding that voter ID be made the sole document required for voting. West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, then a leader of the Youth Congress, was leading the protest demonstration.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
38 minutes ago
- India Today
Calcutta High Court allows protest on first anniversary of RG Kar student murder
The Calcutta High Court has granted permission to hold Nabanna Abhiyan (March to State secretariat) called by students and supported by BJP and RG Kar victim's march is scheduled to be held on August 9, marking the first anniversary of the RG Kar student's murder.A PIL was filed by a businessman from Howrah, where the state secretariat is situated, asking for a ban on the march due to harassment and business losses to Howrah While passing the order, Division Bench of Justice Sujay Paul and Justice Smita Das Dey observed that peaceful protest is a fundamental right.'This Court poignantly held that the right to protest is a fundamental right. Thus, no case is made for passing any blanket prohibitory order on a similar protest," the court said. "As noted above, the police have already issued the prohibitory order and it will be open for the government to implement the said prohibitory order in accordance with the law and inform the organisers about adequate alternative places for protest," the court observed. "While not granting any interim relief as prayed for against the protest, we are inclined to observe that it will be lawful for the persons participating in the protest to protest peacefully as law-abiding citizens and not cause any harm to the police or government authorities, buildings, public properties etc," the court added. BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari has supported the march on August 9 and will join the march, while parents of RG Kar victims have also agreed to be part of the arguing, the state claimed that last year's Nabanna abhiyan resulted in the injury of more than 40 police personnel and one policemen had to lose his eyes. Apart from injury, government installations were also court has thus ordered the protesters to hold the march in a peaceful manner without any violence.- EndsMust Watch
NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
"Will Vacate Official Residence On Time Post Retirement": Chief Justice BR Gavai
New Delhi: Chief Justice of India B R Gavai on Thursday said due to time constraints he would not be able to find a suitable house by the time he retires in November and "for sure vacate" his official residence within the time period allowed under the rules. Bidding farewell to outgoing Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, who is set to superannuate on August 9, the CJI at an event organised by Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA) called him a "warm person" who dedicated his career to the judiciary. Speaking to an audience comprising judges of the top court and high court aside from senior lawyers and their family members the CJI said Justice Dhulia would vacate his official residence, a day after his retirement. "We will always remember his contribution to the judiciary. After retirement, he is going to be in Delhi, and he'll be one of the judges who will be vacating the house immediately. On the next day of his retirement," the CJI said. Interestingly, a month ago in an unprecedented move, the Supreme Court administration wrote to the Centre to vacate the official residence of the Chief Justice of India at Krishna Menon Marg in Delhi, noting former CJI DY Chandrachud had stayed beyond the permissible period. Earlier in August, however, Justice Chandrachud vacated the official residence of the head of the judiciary. Referring to his and Justice Dhulia's situation, the CJI said, "As a matter of fact, that's a rarity. I wish I would also be in a position to do it till November 24. I won't find time to find a suitable house, but I can assure you that whatever time is permissible as per the rules, I'll be shifting before that. But Justice Dhulia has set a very good example. I am sure that many of us can emulate him." Justice Dhulia was a part of numerous judgements in the apex court, including the hijab ban case from Karnataka in which he dissented with the majority view and held there should be no restriction on the wearing of hijab anywhere in the schools and colleges of the state. When speakers lauded the verdict, Justice Dhulia said, "Let me tell you I was not defending the Hijab. What I was defending was the choice of women to wear Hijab. If I have a judicial philosophy, then I can only say that my judicial philosophy is everything is around the human being. Everything which is for the benefit of a human being is my judicial philosophy." The outgoing judge lauded the contributions of advocates-on-record and asked them to gear up for "their importance rises with the rise in litigation" and indicated that he would speak more on Friday, his last working day. In April, a bench headed by Justice Dhulia ruled Urdu language was born in this land and described it as the finest specimen of "Ganga Jamuni tahzeeb". The bench said considering it a language of Muslims was a "pitiable digression" from reality and unity in diversity. Justice Dhulia was born on August 10, 1960 and completed schooling in Dehradun, Allahabad and Lucknow. He was elevated as a permanent Judge of Uttarakhand High Court on November 1, 2008 and took oath as the Chief Justice of Gauhati High Court on January 10, 2021 before being elevated to the top court on May 9, 2022. PTI MNL MNL AMK AMK
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
13 Allahabad High Court judges urge Chief Justice to not follow Supreme Court's directive
Three days after the Supreme Court issued a scathing order barring an Allahabad High Court judge from hearing criminal cases until his retirement, several judges of the High Court have come out in support of their fellow judge opposing the implementation of the apex court's directive. Thirteen judges of the Allahabad High Court have written to Chief Justice Arun Bhansali, requesting the convening of a Full Court meeting and urging that the apex court's order removing Justice Prashant Kumar from the criminal roster not be implemented. The letter was circulated on Thursday (August 7, 2025), even as the Supreme Court relisted the case in which it made the remarks against Justice Kumar for allowing criminal proceedings in a civil dispute case. 'The Full Court resolves that direction made in para 24 to 26 in the subject order dated August 4, 2025 is not to be complied with as the Supreme Court does not have administrative superintendence over the High Courts,' the letter said. The High Court judges also recorded their 'anguish in respect of tone and tenor of said order'. On August 4, 2025, a Supreme Court Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan had reprimanded Justice Kumar for 'cutting a sorry figure for himself' and making 'a mockery of justice'. The apex court had taken stern exception to Justice Kumar finding nothing wrong in a litigant filing a criminal case against a buyer in a purely civil dispute over an unpaid balance of money in a sale transaction. The Bench said the High Court judge had found nothing wrong in allowing a criminal case for 'criminal breach of trust' registered in the civil dispute. 'We are at our wits' end to understand what is wrong with the Indian judiciary at the level of the High Court. At times we are left wondering whether such orders are passed on some extraneous considerations or it is sheer ignorance of law. Whatever it be, passing of such absurd and erroneous orders is something unpardonable,' the Bench said. The Indian legal system has been witnessing a troubling trend of the increasing misuse of criminal law in matters that are fundamentally civil in nature. This tendency has been seen in civil disputes, such as money recovery, cheque bounce case, contractual disagreements, inheritance, property partitions, commercial transactions and others. In April this year, then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna came down heavily on the Uttar Pradesh government over the growing trend of ordinary civil disputes being converted into criminal cases. His remarks came during the hearing of an appeal filed by two individuals facing a cheque bounce case, who were also slapped with criminal charges, including breach of trust, intimidation, and criminal conspiracy.
