Calcutta High Court Grants Major Legal Relief to Jailed Congress Candidate Milan Pradhan in Nandigram By-Election The Calcutta High Court barred coercive police action against Congress candidate Milan Pradhan in a 2007 case, reiterating that he must be allowed to contest the upcoming Nandigram by-poll properly. In a crucial judicial intervention just days ahead of the high-stakes assembly by-election in West Bengal's Nandigram constituency, the Calcutta High Court on Thursday reiterated that arrested Congress nominee Milan Pradhan must be allowed to participate and contest the election properly. A single-judge bench presided over by Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya ruled that Pradhan shall not be treated as arrested in connection with an old criminal case under which a lower magistrate court had remanded him to judicial custody until October 7. The timing of the order is critical, as voting in Nandigram is scheduled to take place on October 6, with public campaigning coming to an end on October 4. The ruling effectively restrains the authorities from utilizing the decade-old case to disrupt his active participation in the poll fray. Interim Shield from Coercive Police Action in 2007 Khejuri Case Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya issued clear instructions directing the state police machinery not to take any coercive steps against Milan Pradhan until October 12 in connection with case number 45 of 2007, registered at the Khejuri police station in Purba Medinipur district. The bench also observed with surprise that the underlying criminal complaint dated back to 2007, yet the investigating officer abruptly moved a requisition on September 19 seeking to show the petitioner formally arrested in the case. Justice Bhattacharyya questioned why the police suddenly woke up after nearly two decades, asking what the investigating officers were doing for all these years if an arrest warrant had been pending against the accused, and why such urgency arose in the middle of an election schedule. Contentions Over Production Warrant and Legal Scrutiny Appearing on behalf of the detained candidate, advocate Ayan Bhattacharjee submitted that during an earlier hearing on September 22, the state government had presented a consolidated position stating that there were 11 cases in total, out of which five were pending, five had been withdrawn by the previous government, and his presence was not required in the sixth case. The counsel pointed out that despite this solemn statement before the High Court, the police managed to get Pradhan shown as arrested in yet another old criminal case, subsequently securing his custody from a lower court until October 7. The defense argued that neither the petitioner nor the court was informed about the Khejuri police station case on September 22, and the prosecution deliberately suppressed details regarding any production warrant. Countering these submissions, Additional Advocate General Rajdeep Majumdar informed the court that the Contai ACJM court had issued a production warrant against Pradhan on September 19 in connection with the Khejuri police station case, which involves serious charges under the Indian Penal Code, including murder and attempt to murder. However, upon examining the case records, Justice Bhattacharyya noted that the state had failed to produce any documentary evidence establishing that a production warrant was formally issued or served on Pradhan. Addressing the Additional Advocate General orally, the judge emphasized that Pradhan must be allowed to contest the by-poll, reiterating the sentiment expressed during the September 22 proceedings that if the Congress candidate secures bail in the five cases for which he was initially held, the administration must facilitate his fair participation in the election. Legal Odyssey of 2007 Cases Withdrawn in 2020 and Revived in 2021 The legal history surrounding the criminal cases filed against Milan Pradhan traces back to the turbulent period of 2007, when violent agitations erupted across Nandigram and Khejuri in Purba Medinipur against the proposed land acquisition by the then Left Front administration. According to police records, the pending cases include severe charges such as murder, attempt to murder, kidnapping with intent to murder, disappearance of evidence, criminal house trespass, rioting armed with deadly weapons, and offenses under the Arms Act. Pradhan had already approached the courts seeking bail in four of the criminal matters pending against him. Additional Advocate General Majumdar clarified that the previous administration had taken a formal decision in 2020 to withdraw all six cases in which Pradhan was implicated. However, in 2021, the Calcutta High Court intervened on a public interest litigation and directed the revival and reopening of those proceedings, taking into account the gravity of the murder charges. When the court queried why the state authorities had not executed pending arrest warrants earlier, the government counsel maintained that the previous administration had not pursued any action in those matters. The bench stressed that once the state had placed on record that the candidate was not required in other matters, the police should not have arbitrarily added fresh cases to prolong his detention. Arrest Followed Sudden Realignment in By-Poll Politics The legal tussle surrounding Milan Pradhan is inextricably linked with a dramatic turn of political events in Nandigram. The contest was reshaped after Trinamool Congress candidate Sanchita Pradhan Dey abruptly withdrew her nomination from the by-election. Following her withdrawal, Mamata Banerjee announced that her party faction would extend political support to the Congress candidate, Milan Pradhan. In a rapid sequence of events, within hours of this high-profile political endorsement, the police arrested Pradhan on September 18. Defense counsel urged the High Court to issue comprehensive directions restraining the state from initiating further punitive or coercive measures under any pretext until the electoral process concludes. What this means for you The Calcutta High Court's directive restores democratic balance in the Nandigram by-poll by ensuring that administrative actions do not arbitrarily eliminate electoral choices. • Voter Rights: Electors in Nandigram retain the opportunity to choose among all active candidates rather than facing a truncated contest. Judicial protection for the nominee safeguards the fundamental democratic principle of a competitive ballot. • Electoral Due Process: Restraining sudden arrests immediately before polling establishes strict boundaries against potential abuse of executive discretion. The election machinery and police must adhere strictly to fair play while public campaigning is underway. • In West Bengal: The ruling sends a strong signal across the state against reviving decades-old criminal complaints to impede opposition candidates during active election cycles. District administrations will face heightened judicial scrutiny over procedural compliances like production warrants. • Across India: The decision sets an important national precedent reinforcing that judicial custody cannot be artificially extended through selective re-arrests during campaign windows. It protects the integrity of the electoral process from partisan policing across states. Why this happened The legal controversy arose when Congress nominee Milan Pradhan was arrested shortly after receiving unexpected political backing, followed by the police invoking decades-old complaints to keep him incarcerated during the by-poll. • Sudden Political Shift: Following the withdrawal of Trinamool Congress nominee Sanchita Pradhan Dey, Mamata Banerjee declared support for Milan Pradhan. Within hours of this announcement on September 18, the state police placed Pradhan under arrest. • Historical Background of Cases: Multiple criminal cases were instituted against Pradhan in 2007 during the violent anti-land acquisition stir in Nandigram and Khejuri. Although withdrawn in 2020, the Calcutta High Court ordered them reopened in 2021 following a public interest litigation citing murder charges. • Procedural Non-Compliance: After the state informed the High Court on September 22 that no other matters were pending beyond 11 cases, police showed him arrested in another 2007 case without producing valid documentation of a production warrant. This prompted the High Court to halt coercive actions until October 12. Questions & Answers 1. What order did the Calcutta High Court pass regarding Milan Pradhan? The High Court directed authorities not to take coercive action against Milan Pradhan until October 12 in the 2007 Khejuri case and ruled he shall not be treated as arrested in it. 2. What are the key dates for the Nandigram by-election? Voting for the Nandigram by-poll is scheduled for October 6, while the election campaigning period concludes on October 4. 3. What criminal charges were originally registered against Milan Pradhan? The charges relate to the 2007 Nandigram land agitation, including murder, attempt to murder, rioting with deadly weapons, and violations under the Arms Act. 4. What political event preceded Milan Pradhan's arrest on September 18? He was arrested hours after Mamata Banerjee announced that her party faction would support the Congress candidate following the withdrawal of Trinamool nominee Sanchita Pradhan Dey. https://trendkia.com/en/west-bengal/nandigram-upachunava-men-congress-pratyashi-milan-pradhan-ko-calcutta-high-court-se-bari-kanuni-rahata-37703 TrendKia — Har trend, sabse pehle.