Calcutta High Court on Wednesday heard arguments on a CBI petition seeking the transfer of the Narada case outside Bengal and another by the three arrested Trinamul leaders and a former mayor, and will resume the proceedings on Thursday.

Trinamul Congress leaders Subrata Mukherjee, Firhad Hakim and Madan Mitra, besides former Trinamul leader Sovan Chatterjee who quit the BJP just before the elections, remain in custody in the absence of a decision on Wednesday.

As the proceedings took place online with the judges at their respective homes and the lawyers at the high court, the following information on Wednesday’s hearing is based on accounts by multiple sources.

Before the division bench of acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Arijit Banerjee, CBI counsel and solicitor-general of India Tushar Mehta said Monday’s dharna by chief minister Mamata Banerjee at the CBI office in the Nizam Palace, the presence of state law minister Moloy Ghatak in the trial court during the hearing of the bail petitions, and the demonstration by Trinamul supporters outside Nizam Palace had influenced the trial court proceedings.

The CBI special court had granted the four leaders bail, which was stayed on Monday night by the high court bench.

Congress Rajya Sabha member (from Bengal) Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Siddharth Luthra and Trinamul’s Serampore MP Kalyan Banerjee appeared for the accused and raised the following points.

• What prompted the CBI to arrest the leaders five years after the case was lodged and at a time the state was under restrictions because of Covid-19?

• Why were the accused not served with notices by the CBI before their arrests?

• Why were the accused not served with copies of the application from the CBI before the agency moved the high court on Monday?

• What was the necessity for the investigating agency to put the leaders behind bars after the submission of the chargesheet against them?

The defence lawyers prayed for bail for their clients, underscoring that all four were aged and ill.

Mehta, the solicitor-general, raised the following points.

• Why did the chief minister stage a dharna inside the CBI office and intervene in the investigation?

• Why were the state law minister and four of his cabinet colleagues present in the trial court during the hearing of the bail petitions?

• Why did the chief minister and her party’s leaders not dissuade their supporters from agitating outside the CBI office?

• The agitating supporters restrained the CBI officers from performing their duties and producing the accused before the trial court physically.

Countering the points raised by Mehta, Singhvi referred to instances involving Bollywood stars Sanjay Dutt and Salman Khan when people at large had demonstrated against police action.

“In cases of heavyweights, holding of such demonstrations is not a new phenomenon. Courts are not influenced due to such demonstrations. Moreover, before the CBI court, too, the hearing took place virtually, where the judge was in another place. So the question of influencing him (with the presence of law minister Ghatak) does not arise,” said Singhvi.

He said Mamata had gone to the CBI office as two of her cabinet colleagues (Mukherjee and Hakim) had been arrested, and she did not restrain the officers from doing their job.

CBI counsel Mehta said the Delhi office of the CBI had sent an appeal to acting Chief Justice Bindal of Calcutta High Court while the chief minister was sitting in its Calcutta office and its officers were being prevented by the demonstrators from performing their duties.

“As time was very short, that very letter was treated as an application before the high court during the evening. That is why copies of the appeal could not be served to the accused leaders,” said Mehta.

The following questions were raised by the bench.

• Justice Banerjee to Mehta: When the chargesheet has been furnished against the accused persons, what is the necessity to seek their custody?

Mehta: Being influential persons who can influence the investigation.

• Acting Chief Justice Bindal to Singhvi: How long did the chief minister stay inside the CBI office, and what was she doing there? Why was the law minister present in the court during the hearing? Was he inside the courtroom during the hearing of the bail petition? What action had the party leaders taken against their supporters agitating outside?

Singhvi said Mamata sat inside the office but did not cause any obstruction. He said Hakim had himself asked his supporters not to agitate while he was being brought to the CBI office by the investigators, video footage of which was available.