Calcutta High Court Judge Recuses From Sujit Bose Bail Plea After Alleged Attempt to Access Reserved Case Record
Legal News | 21 August 2026
A Judge of the Calcutta High Court has recused from hearing a bail application filed by former West Bengal minister Sujit Bose after recording an alleged attempt to access the case record from the Judge’s chamber after the matter had already been reserved for judgment.
The application was a bail plea under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and was being contested by the Enforcement Directorate.
Matter had been reserved
According to the High Court’s order, the bail matter had been reserved for judgment on 17 August 2026. The following day, while the Judge was in court, one of the counsel appearing for the petitioner, along with the Judge’s private secretary, allegedly sought access to the record kept in the chamber.
The order records that staff declined to produce the record and resisted the attempt to enter the chamber for that purpose.
Court releases the matter
The Judge took serious exception to the alleged conduct and considered it appropriate to release the matter from her list. The effect is procedural rather than a determination on bail: the application will have to be placed before another Bench in accordance with the High Court’s roster and administrative procedure.
The order does not decide whether Bose is entitled to bail and contains no adjudication of the merits of the Enforcement Directorate’s case.
Institutional significance
The episode highlights the strict protection surrounding judicial records once a matter is reserved for judgment. Access to records, drafts or chamber material outside authorised court procedure can undermine confidence in the integrity and independence of adjudication, irrespective of whether any substantive information is actually obtained.
It also illustrates why recusal or release of a matter may sometimes be adopted to preserve institutional confidence even where the merits remain entirely open.
This report is confined to the Calcutta High Court’s procedural order and the allegations recorded therein. It does not express any view on the merits of the pending bail application or the alleged conduct.