Back
Grants to Congress Candidate Milan Pradhan in Nandigram Cases
The on Tuesday granted three-week to Milan Pradhan, the Congress candidate for the Nandigram Assembly bypoll, allowing him to campaign for the election. Justice Tirthankar Ghosh ordered Pradhan's release on in connection with six criminal cases dating back to the Nandigram land agitation, observing that the police had waited nearly 19 years to execute warrants only after he filed his .
A Historic Struggle: The Nandigram Background
The cases against Pradhan arise from the violent protests against the 's proposed acquisition of farmland for a chemical hub in Nandigram. The movement, which saw widespread agitation and loss of life, became a defining chapter in the state's political history. Pradhan, a businessman and office-bearer of the , was actively involved in the anti-land acquisition movement.
On , Pradhan filed his nomination for the Nandigram bypoll. Three days later, he was arrested—hours after former Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee announced her faction's support for his candidature. The police executed that had remained dormant for 19 years.
Election vs. Investigation: The Core Tussle
, appearing for Pradhan, argued that the arrest was politically motivated. He pointed out that the police had never acted on the warrants in nearly two decades, and only moved after Pradhan became a contesting candidate.
"Let him participate in the election,"
Mukherjee submitted, drawing parallels to the
's decision in
, where was granted to enable election campaigning.
The State, represented by , opposed the plea, emphasizing the gravity of the charges—murder, rioting, and arms offences. Majumdar argued that a candidate cannot claim simply because he is contesting an election, and cited the 's reference to the Mohd. Tahir Hussain case and the 's refusal of bail in .
Court's : A Distinguishing Factor
Justice Ghosh noted that Pradhan's case was from the precedents relied upon by both sides. In Arvind Kejriwal , , Mohd. Tahir Hussain , and Ritlal Yadav , the accused were already in custody when they sought bail to contest elections. Here, Pradhan was arrested after filing his nomination—a crucial difference.
"The petitioner's case is
from the cases considered in the judgments relied upon by both parties. The petitioner was taken into custody after filing his nomination on
; he was not in custody when he filed the
,"
the court observed.
The court also took of the 's investigation into the Nandigram violence and the historical context of the farmers' struggle. It emphasized that the police had ample opportunity over 19 years to , and their timing raised legitimate concerns.
Key Observations from the Judgment
-
"The events at Nandigram form part of the history of West Bengal, particularly the farmers’ struggle to protect the land acquisition to which they were deeply attached."
-
"In none of those cases was a contesting candidate arrested after filing his ."
-
"The police authorities and both police stations had opportunities to in these cases, which are more than 19 years old."
- "The Hon’ble ’s observation in Arvind Kejriwal that a must be adopted applies to the present petitioner as well."
The Decision: with Conditions
The court directed Pradhan's release on furnishing a of ₹20,000 with two of ₹10,000 each, one of whom must be local. The will remain valid until , and Pradhan must surrender before the (or Contai, as applicable) on .
To ensure compliance, the court imposed a unique monitoring condition: Pradhan must provide his mobile number to the Officer-in-Charge of the respective police station, who will call him twice daily—between 10.30–11.30 am and 8.30–9.30 pm—to verify his whereabouts.
Implications for the Nandigram Bypoll
The bypoll, scheduled for , has become a high-stakes contest. The seat fell vacant after Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari, who won both Nandigram and Bhabanipur, chose to retain the latter. Pradhan's arrest had disrupted his campaign, with his wife and local party workers stepping in. The High Court's order now allows him to directly engage with voters in the final week of campaigning.
West Bengal Congress President Subhankar Sarkar welcomed the verdict, calling it "a victory for truth." The ruling reinforces the principle that the , a cornerstone of democracy, must be balanced against the interests of justice—particularly when the timing of arrest raises serious questions about its motive.
