Kolkata, Feb 8 (IANS): Kolkata Police on Wednesday submitted its report on the slanderous postering in front of the residence of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha of the Calcutta High Court to the special three-judge bench of the same court constituted for the purpose.
However, the special bench of Justices T.S. Sivagnanam, Indra Prasanna Mukerji and Chittaranjan Dash expressed anguish over the report as it lacked specifics about the probable trouble-makers who were behind the postering.
The report also could not specify the printing press where these slanderous posters were printed.
Observing that the police should have been more proactive in investigating the matter, the bench gave additional time to the police to submit a fresh report on this count.
In the report, the police named six persons as probable offenders in the matter of slanderous postering. It also mentioned that the police have collected CCTV footage from seven places and questioned the owners of 39 printing presses.
Although the paper and ink used in printing the posters have been sent to the central forensic science laboratory, the latter has claimed that it does not have the required infrastructure for conducting such tests.
Justice Mukerji stressed that it is extremely urgent to identify the offenders behind the postering act and identify the printing press where the posters were printed.
The police report, at the same time, remained silent about identifying the advocates who created ruckus in front of the court of Justice Mantha. The report claimed that there was no clear CCTV footage from which the offenders could be identified.
Justice Sivagnanam observed that the advocates responsible for the ruckus should come forward owning their responsibilities.
"This cannot be the gesture from those who are quite vocal about their right to protest. The bar association surely has the right to protest on specific issues. But in this case, a judge of the Calcutta High Court has been insulted. Why is a section of the public prosecutors still refusing to appear at the court of Justice Mantha? This is not a healthy trend," Justice Sivagnanam noted.