Shiv Sena (UBT) leader and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut launched a scathing attack on Calcutta High Court judge Abhijit Gangopadhyay for his decision to enter politics, alleging that it implied a compromise in the delivery of justice in favor of political interests. Raut questioned the integrity of Justice Gangopadhyay’s tenure, suggesting that his move raised doubts about the impartiality of the judiciary.
“If sitting judges of the High Court and Supreme Court resign and join a particular political party, it means they were not delivering justice, but working for the party,” asserted Sanjay Raut in response to Justice Gangopadhyay’s announcement of joining politics.
Justice Gangopadhyay, in an interview with ANI on Sunday, revealed his intention to resign from his judicial position, citing a sense of fulfillment in addressing various corruption scandals, particularly in the education and labor sectors. He expressed his belief that a larger platform, such as politics, would provide him with the opportunity to advocate for marginalized individuals effectively.
While Justice Gangopadhyay refrained from disclosing his political affiliation, sources have indicated his likely association with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The judge is expected to retire in July, having served in the high court since 2018.
Notably, Justice Gangopadhyay’s tenure has been marked by confrontations with the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) government in West Bengal. He faced criticism and alleged harassment from certain quarters within the ruling party, attributing his decision to enter politics partly to these experiences.
The judge’s judicial interventions, including ordering CBI probes into recruitment scams and calling for investigations into the financial assets of political figures, drew attention and sometimes ire from TMC leaders. In response to the judge’s inquiries, TMC leaders challenged him to contest against Abhishek Banerjee, Mamata Banerjee’s nephew, in the Lok Sabha elections.
Sanjay Raut’s critique of Justice Gangopadhyay’s political move underscores concerns about the perceived politicization of the judiciary and its potential implications for the rule of law. The incident reflects broader debates surrounding the independence and integrity of the judiciary in India’s political landscape.
