Allow Congress candidate to contest Nandigram by-poll: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday orally observed that the West Bengal government should allow Congress candidate Milan Pradhan to contest and campaign for the Nandigram by-election on October 6. Pradhan was arrested on September 18 in a 2007 murder case and later shown arrested in five other cases from the same year. Courts at Contai and Haldia sent him to judicial custody till October 7. The bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya expressed surprise that 2007 cases showed arrest in 2026.

Written by AI from Hindustan Times — India · not yet reviewed by an editor · Published 24 Sept 2026, 9:32 pm IST

Source

Hindustan Times — India · read the original report ↗

#nandigram#calcutta high court#by-election#congress#west bengal

Desk check · compared with the source

What the desk checked (5)

Calcutta High Court orally observed that Congress candidate Milan Pradhan should be allowed to contest the Nandigram by-election on October 6. — Attributed in source to the bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya as an oral observation; quoted directly.
Pradhan was arrested on September 18 in a 2007 murder case and later shown arrested in five other 2007 cases; lower courts at Contai and Haldia sent him to judicial custody till October 7. — Dates and sequence appear in source without naming an official source; internally consistent.
Eleven cases were registered against Pradhan at Nandigram and Khejuri police stations in 2007, five of them murder cases. — Figure appears in source; no investigating agency document cited.
The TMC government withdrew all cases in 2020 and they were reinstated in 2021 after a PIL in the high court. — Attributed to additional advocate general Rajdeep Majumder/Mazumder, whose name is spelt two ways in the source.
The court directed police not to take coercive steps against Pradhan in the Khejuri case till October 12. — Attributed to the court via counsel Ajitesh Pandey; source also notes the police showed the arrest in 2026, which the bench called surprising.

Written by AI from Hindustan Times — India · not yet reviewed by an editor · How we use AI · Report an error

Analysts’ view opinion

AI Political Analyst

Nandigram is not just a constituency in Bengal politics; it is a symbol, so a candidate sitting in judicial custody until the day after polling becomes a political story well beyond the arithmetic of one by-election. The high court's expressed surprise that 2007 cases produced an arrest shown in 2026, and its question about what the investigating officer was doing from 2021 onwards, hand the opposition a courtroom-anchored line about misuse of state machinery. At the same time, the state's account — that the cases are murder cases withdrawn in 2020 and reinstated in 2021 after a PIL — gives the government a defensible counter-narrative. Net effect: the Congress candidate may gain more visibility and sympathy than the seat itself is worth.

The story makes clear the arrest does not disqualify him, so the real contest is over campaign time, not eligibility — which sharpens the political rather than legal stakes.
An oral observation is not a binding order, but "allow him to contest" is a potent line for opposition messaging regardless of the final legal outcome.
The court's puzzlement over a 2026 arrest in 2007 cases, and the gap between 2021 and September 2026, pushes questions of timing into the political debate.
The state's explanation — withdrawal in 2020, reinstatement in 2021 following a PIL — supports a counter-argument that this is court-driven process, not political vendetta.
Because this is Nandigram, the state-level narrative impact could outrun whatever the local result turns out to be.

What to watch — Watch the outcome of the bail petitions listed for Friday and whether Pradhan can campaign at all before October 6 — that determines whether this stays a legal dispute or becomes a statewide political issue.

The story establishes neither guilt nor innocence, nor any proven political motive behind the arrests; the bail decision and formal party reactions are still unknown.

Deep dive

Research brief · 8 facts · 8 dates · exam-ready

The brief

Context

The Nandigram assembly seat in West Bengal's East Midnapore district is due to go to a by-election on October 6. The Congress candidate, Milan Pradhan, was arrested on September 18 in connection with a 2007 murder case and subsequently shown arrested in five more cases, all registered in 2007, leaving him in judicial custody during the campaign period. Hearing his petition, the Calcutta High Court orally observed that the state government should allow him to contest and campaign, and questioned why cases from 2007 were being pursued with arrests shown in 2026. The source notes that arrest and judicial custody do not by themselves disqualify him from contesting.

Key facts

Nandigram by-election is scheduled for October 6.
Congress candidate Milan Pradhan was arrested on September 18 in a 2007 murder case, and later shown arrested in five other cases registered the same year.
Lower courts at Contai and Haldia in East Midnapore sent Pradhan to judicial custody till October 7.
The bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya orally said "Allow him to contest", addressing additional advocate general Rajdeep Majumder.
The court directed state police not to take coercive steps against Pradhan in the Khejuri 2007 case till October 12.
In all, 11 cases were registered against Pradhan at Nandigram and Khejuri police stations in 2007; five were murder cases.
The state told the court the previous Trinamool Congress government withdrew all the cases in 2020; they were reinstated in 2021 after a PIL in the Calcutta High Court flagged that they were murder cases.
Pradhan's counsel Ajitesh Pandey said bail petitions were filed in four cases, with the fifth to be filed on Friday and hearings likely the same day.

Timeline

2007Eleven cases, including five murder cases, registered against Milan Pradhan at Nandigram and Khejuri police stations.
2020The then Trinamool Congress government withdrew all the cases, as informed to the court by the state's counsel.
2021Cases reinstated after a PIL in the Calcutta High Court flagged that they were murder cases.
September 18Pradhan arrested in connection with a 2007 murder case; later shown arrested in five more 2007 cases.
September 22Previous hearing in the High Court, in which the Khejuri 2007 case was not flagged, per Pradhan's advocate.
Earlier this week (before the hearing)Courts at Contai and Haldia sent Pradhan to judicial custody till October 7.
Thursday (day of hearing)Calcutta High Court orally observes Pradhan should be allowed to contest and campaign; bars coercive steps in one case till October 12.
October 6Nandigram by-election scheduled.

Who has a stake

Milan Pradhan, Congress candidate — In judicial custody till October 7; cannot campaign for the October 6 by-poll unless granted bail, though custody does not disqualify him from contesting.
Calcutta High Court (Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya's bench) — Examining the legality and timing of arrests in 2007 cases and protecting the candidate's ability to contest and campaign.
West Bengal government / state police — Represented by additional advocate general Rajdeep Majumder; questioned by the court on the investigating officer's inaction between 2021 and September 2026.
Trinamool Congress — Its earlier government withdrew the 2007 cases in 2020, a decision now central to the court's scrutiny.
Congress party — Its candidate's ability to campaign in the Nandigram by-poll is at stake.
Voters of Nandigram — Face a by-poll on October 6 in which one candidate may be unable to campaign.

Why it matters

The case tests whether criminal process can effectively remove a candidate from the campaign trail even without legal disqualification, a core question of free and fair elections. The High Court's surprise that 2007 prosecutions produced arrests shown in 2026, and its query on what the investigating officer did between 2021 and September 2026, points to concerns about selective or delayed policing in a politically charged constituency.

UPSC angle

Prelims pointers

Nandigram is an assembly constituency in East Midnapore (Purba Medinipur) district, West Bengal; by-poll scheduled October 6.
Arrest and judicial custody do not by themselves disqualify a person from contesting an election, as noted in the source.
Bench: Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya of the Calcutta High Court; state represented by Additional Advocate General Rajdeep Majumder.
Eleven cases were registered against Milan Pradhan in 2007 at Nandigram and Khejuri police stations; five were murder cases.
Cases withdrawn by the then TMC government in 2020 were reinstated in 2021 after a PIL in the Calcutta High Court.
Court barred coercive police steps against Pradhan in the Khejuri 2007 case till October 12.

Mains framing

The Nandigram episode raises the question of how far the criminal justice process can, without formally disqualifying a candidate, curtail his ability to contest and campaign. Here a Congress candidate arrested on September 18 in a 2007 murder case and shown arrested in five more 2007 cases was remanded to judicial custody till October 7, a day after the October 6 by-poll, making campaigning impossible unless bail is granted. The High Court's observations expose two systemic issues: the extraordinary delay in investigation, with cases withdrawn by the previous TMC government in 2020, reinstated in 2021 after a PIL, and arrests shown only in 2026; and the risk that such timing, whatever its legal basis, undermines the level playing field central to free and fair elections. The court's remedy in this instance was minimal and interim: an oral observation that the candidate be allowed to contest and campaign, a direction that he not be treated as arrested in the Khejuri case not flagged at the September 22 hearing, and a bar on coercive steps till October 12, with bail petitions in four cases pending and a fifth to be filed. The way forward suggested by the facts is time-bound investigation in long-pending serious cases and judicial vigilance over the timing of arrests close to elections, rather than any blanket immunity for candidates facing murder charges.

Key terms

By-election (by-poll): An election held to fill a single vacant seat between general elections; here for the Nandigram assembly seat on October 6.
Judicial custody: Detention of an accused in prison under a magistrate's or court's order, as distinct from police custody; Pradhan was remanded till October 7.
Additional Advocate General: A senior law officer appearing for a state government in court; Rajdeep Majumder appeared for West Bengal in this matter.
PIL (Public Interest Litigation): A petition filed in the public interest; a PIL in the Calcutta High Court led to the 2007 cases being reinstated in 2021.
Coercive steps: Police action such as arrest or detention; the court barred such steps against Pradhan in the Khejuri 2007 case till October 12.
IO (Investigating Officer): The police officer in charge of investigating a case; the court asked what the IO was doing between 2021 and September 2026.

Practice questions

Arrest and custody do not disqualify a person from contesting elections in India. Discuss how the timing of criminal process can nonetheless affect electoral fairness, with reference to the Nandigram by-poll case.
Examine the role of constitutional courts in safeguarding a level playing field during elections, using the Calcutta High Court's interim observations in the Milan Pradhan case as an illustration.
Long-pending criminal cases involving politicians raise concerns about both impunity and misuse of process. Suggest institutional reforms to ensure time-bound investigation in such cases.

Grounded only in the source report — figures and dates are the source's, not inferred.

Next storyFSSAI proposes ban on analogue products sold as paneer →

← All stories