The Calcutta High Court has granted interim bail for three weeks, till October 21, to the Congress’s Nandigram bypoll candidate Milan Pradhan in cases arising from the 2007 Nandigram agitation, observing that he was taken into custody only after filing his nomination papers.
Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday granted interim bail for three weeks, till October 21, to Milan Pradhan, the Congress candidate for the Nandigram Assembly bypoll, in criminal cases that stem from the 2007 Nandigram agitation, so that he can contest and campaign in the bypoll scheduled for October 6 [Milan Pradhan v. State of West Bengal].
Justice Tirthankar Ghosh passed the order while hearing Pradhan’s plea for interim bail. The detailed order has not been reviewed by LawChakra, and the account below is based on reports of the hearing.
The case
The cases against Pradhan date to 2007. According to reports, they were registered during the Nandigram anti-land-acquisition movement and include charges such as murder, attempt to murder and offences under the Arms Act. These are allegations, they are untested, and Pradhan is presumed innocent. The interim bail order does not decide the merits of any of the cases.
Before the present order, a Division Bench led by Chief Justice RV Ghuge had set aside the protection granted to Pradhan by a Single Bench in connection with the 2007 cases and had directed him to approach the appropriate court in accordance with law. The Division Bench questioned the earlier protection and observed that he could seek bail through the regular legal process. Pradhan then approached the bail court for interim relief in view of the approaching bypoll.
What the parties argued
Opposing interim bail at an earlier hearing, the State submitted that the cases involved allegations of murder and that coercive processes, including warrants, had been issued. It also raised an apprehension that Pradhan could influence witnesses.
Appearing for Pradhan, Senior Advocate Milan Mukherjee argued that his client had been arrested after announcing his candidature and that the State had not placed material before the Court showing his role in the alleged offences. He also highlighted the age of the cases and relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in the case concerning former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. Additional Advocate General Rajdeep Majumdar represented the State.
What the Court observed
The Court noted that Pradhan was not in custody when he filed his nomination papers and was arrested afterwards, and that the State had not produced material to show that he was wanted in connection with any offence after 2007. It noted that the entire incident forming the basis of the cases had been investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and observed that Pradhan was a political activist who took part in the 2007 agitation and continues to be a political worker.
The Court pointed out that, in none of the cases relied on by the State, had a person been arrested after filing nomination papers. It also observed that the police had more than sufficient time to execute the warrants in cases that are nearly 19 years old. Considering that the elections were approaching, and relying on the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Kejriwal case, the Court took what it described as a holistic and libertarian view, held that Pradhan should be given an opportunity to contest the election, and ordered his release on interim bail for three weeks, till October 21.
Why it matters
The order balances two competing considerations that both sides pressed before the Court: the State’s concern about the seriousness of the allegations and the risk of influencing witnesses, and the candidate’s plea that he should be free to contest an election he was nominated for. The Court’s reasoning rested on the timing of the arrest, the age of the cases and the absence of material showing later involvement, as reported, and not on any assessment of the allegations themselves.
The relief is interim and time-bound. The bypoll is scheduled for October 6, the bail runs till October 21, and the cases will continue to be governed by the ordinary process. No view is expressed here on the merits of the 2007 cases or on the political contest.
Case Title: Milan Pradhan v. State of West Bengal
Bench: Justice Tirthankar Ghosh, Calcutta High Court
Date of Order: September 29, 2026
Appearances: Senior Advocate Milan Mukherjee appeared for Milan Pradhan, and Additional Advocate General Rajdeep Majumdar appeared for the State of West Bengal.