Sen seeks justice in Rajya Sabha, calls impeachment 'abuse of power'

New Delhi: Appearing before the Rajya Sabha in an impeachment motion, Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court yesterday  said allegations of misconduct and misappropriation of funds against him were aimed at victimising him in a pre-determined move.

In his almost two-hour defence in the Upper House which converted in a court for the first time, Sen pleaded for justice.

He said, “I have exhausted my remedies in accordance with law. I have come here to seek justice. If you impeach me, it will be the gravest of injustice done ever. Kindly apply your mind before deciding on the judgement, as it is a question of my life.”

He said, even if he was impeached, he would “scream from the rooftop that I have not misapropriated…I am being made a sacrificial lamb to cleanse the judiciary.”

Justice Sen appeared before a ‘bar’ “posted” at the gate of the central aisle of the Upper House facing the Chairman Hamid Ansari as CPI-M leader Sitaram Yechury moved two motions against him.

As the impeachment proceedings were about to start, Ansari asked the marshals: “Is Justice Sen in attendance?…Bring him to the Bar of the House.”

The motions supported by Leader of Opposition Arun Jaitley against Sen were on two grounds. One, misappropriation of large sums of money by Sen, which he received in his capacity as a receiver before his elevation to High Court. The second ground being his misrepresentation of facts before the High Court with regard to the misappropriation of money.

Defending himself, Sen said “the decision to hold me guilty was taken long time back” as an inquiry was initiated against him even after a Division Bench of the High Court had cleared him of the charges.

He contended that the case against him was based on the former CJI Justice K G Balakrishanan’s letter to the Prime Minister in this regard. Balakrishnan thought a deeper probe was necessary, though there were no allegations against him, he said.

Sen said his conduct as a judge was never under examination. The allegations of misappropriation against him were in his capacity as a receiver of the High Court in Calcutta and not as a Judge.

“Is there a single allegation against me on the judicial side?” he asked. In a reference to a former CJI, Sen said he has not been held guilty of any “land grabbing or amassing wealth” and neither are there any allegations against his relatives.

Sen said while he did not cast aspersions on judiciary, there seems to have been “abuse of power” by someone holding high office in judiciary. “They are too anxious to hold me guilty.”

He said the allegations against him were only in the form of “adverse observations” by a single judge and subsequently by an in-house Committee.

While one judge disbelieved him, two other judges trusted him in the Division Bench Order, but the former CJI did not believe him. “The man in the highest form of judiciary has held me guilty,” he said, adding there was not much he could do.

“If High Court Judges are treated like this by judiciary, I dare say common people cannot get justice,” said Sen.

Defending his impeachment, Soumitra Sen said allegations against him were aimed at victimising him.

He said he had come before the House as he felt it was the right place to seek justice. “I wanted the right place to speak…To go to judiciary and say is a futile exercise,” he said.

Narrating how he was asked to put in his papers in an “informal” way, 53-year-old Sen said that there was no record of the meeting that happened at the residence of the former CJI, where he was asked to resign.

Stating that the Supreme Court and High Court are two independent bodies, Sen said, “The procedure adopted by Supreme Court was not binding on the High Court.”

Alleging that a trap was laid against him, Sen said an application filed in March 2003 was served on him for the first time in May 2005 and in the meantime many orders were passed.

He also questioned certain decisions taken by the former CJI and cited the cases of Provident Fund Scam, where a key witness died inside jail and when more than Rs 5 lakh was found outside the chamber of the Judge, but action or sanction was refused.

Sen admitted that “there may have been indiscretion on my part as a junior advocate in managing accounts but there is no misappropriation.”

In his defense, Sen said “mere transfer of one account to another is not misappropriation.”

PTI