West Bengal Governor CV Ananda Bose is facing serious allegations from a female Raj Bhavan employee who has accused him of molestation. While the Governor dismissed the accusations as an “engineered narrative,” the developments triggered a political slugfest, deepening the faultlines existing between the Trinamool Congress-ruled West Bengal government and Raj Bhavan.
West Bengal Minister Chandrima Bhattacharya accused the Governor of “insulting women” and questioned Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s upcoming visit to the state for the Lok Sabha elections 2024 campaign. PM Modi is scheduled to stay at Raj Bhavan during his visit.
The Kolkata police have filed a police complaint in the case based on the statements given by the Raj Bhavan employee, but they can’t name Governor CV Ananda Bose in the case due to the immunities provided under Article 361 of the Indian Constitution.
What is Article 361?
Article 361 of the Constitution of India deals with immunities granted to the President of India and Governor of states, which protect them from criminal proceedings and arrest. The article states that the President and Governor “shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties.”
Moreover, Article 361 has two sub-clauses that state that 1. no criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be initiated or continued against the President or the Governor of a State in any court during the term of his office, and 2. no process for the arrest or imprisonment of the President or the Governor of a State shall issue from any court during his term of office.
“Article 361(2) states that a criminal case cannot be initiated against the President and Governor in the court of law. But, the FIR is registered by the police. So, technically, police can register an FIR and investigate,” advocate Vikas Singh told PTI.
“As per Article 361 of the Constitution, the Governor and the President are immune from answering anything in the court of law to exercise their constitutional duties. Therefore, it is a neat question of law that has not yet been decided whether the immunity clause also covers anything beyond the course of those duties,” another senior advocate, Sanjay Hegde, added.
What Supreme Court said in the matter?
As per The Indian Express, the Supreme Court has upheld the immunities provided to the President and Governors by the Constitutions in the landmark Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India case and observed that “the position in law is that the Governor enjoys complete immunity.”
The apex court ruling added, “Governor is not answerable to any Court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties.”
Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it’s all here, just a click away! Login Now!
Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates & Live Business News.
More
Less
Published: 03 May 2024, 07:35 PM IST