The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to interfere with the interim bail granted to Congress' Nandigram bypoll candidate Milan Pradhan, whose relief is set to expire on October 20.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said the objections raised by the West Bengal government could be considered by the Calcutta High Court if Pradhan seeks regular bail or an extension of his interim bail. The bench also comprised Justice V Mohana.
While disposing of the state government's appeal, the Supreme Court made it clear that its decision should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the seriousness of the charges against Pradhan or the six non-bailable warrants pending against him.
State challenges bail over 2007 criminal cases
Pradhan faces six criminal cases dating back to the 2007 Nandigram anti-land acquisition agitation. The cases involve charges including murder, attempt to murder and violations of the Arms Act.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the West Bengal government, argued that the September 29 Calcutta High Court order had failed to adequately consider the gravity of the offences against Pradhan.
The state had approached the Supreme Court after the High Court granted Pradhan interim bail to enable him to contest the October 6 Nandigram bypoll. The High Court's order came after Pradhan was arrested on September 18, several years after the cases were registered.
The Supreme Court had earlier adjourned the matter on October 5 after Justice Joymalya Bagchi, who was part of the bench with CJI Surya Kant, recused himself citing a personal conflict of interest.
Mehta questions delay in executing warrants
Mehta told the Supreme Court that the state should not be faulted for opposing bail in a 2007 criminal case, arguing that the delay in Pradhan's arrest was linked to the failure of the state machinery and police to execute the non-bailable warrants.
He said an application had also been filed under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to withdraw prosecution in one of the cases, but the High Court did not allow it.
The Supreme Court had previously questioned why the authorities had failed to act on the warrants for so many years, observing that the police officers responsible for not executing them should first be held accountable.
“These are 2007 FIRs. On an occasion when he wants to contest the elections, then suddenly you come to know. First of all, action should be taken against those police officers who failed to execute the NBWs,” the court had observed.
Mehta sought to dispel that impression, saying the government of the day became aware of the facts only after Pradhan filed his nomination and subsequently challenged the bail.
SC says High Court wanted Pradhan to contest
The Supreme Court noted that the Calcutta High Court had granted interim bail specifically to enable Pradhan to contest the election held on October 6.
“We are not saying that the gravity of the offences or the NBWs should be ignored. But the high court was of the view that he should not be denied to contest the elections on this ground,” the bench said.
The High Court had observed that Pradhan was a political activist associated with the 2007 Nandigram land movement and that the cases against him were more than 19 years old. It also noted that he had filed his nomination before being arrested.
Justice Tirthankar Ghosh had granted him interim bail for three weeks, allowing him to campaign for the bypoll. He was directed to surrender before the jurisdictional court on October 21.
Arrest came after nomination
Pradhan was arrested on September 18, hours after the Trinamool Congress candidate withdrew from the Nandigram contest and party chief Mamata Banerjee announced support for the Congress candidate.
He had been in judicial remand in six cases, four registered at Nandigram police station and two at neighbouring Khejuri. The charges included murder, attempt to murder and offences under the Arms Act.
The timing of the arrest became a central issue in the High Court's consideration of his bail plea. The court noted that the authorities had had opportunities to execute the processes in cases that were more than 19 years old.
The Nandigram bypoll was held on October 6, with counting scheduled for October 9. The contest was triggered after Suvendu Adhikari vacated the Nandigram seat after retaining Bhabanipur in the 2026 Assembly election.
Bail came with strict conditions
The High Court imposed several conditions while granting Pradhan interim bail.
He was required to furnish a ₹20,000 bail bond in each of the six cases, along with two sureties of ₹10,000 each in the relevant proceedings. He was also directed to provide his mobile number to the investigating officer at Nandigram police station.
The investigating officer was permitted to call Pradhan twice daily, between 10.30 am and 11.30 am and again between 8.30 pm and 9.30 pm, to ascertain his whereabouts.
The interim bail remains valid until October 20, after which Pradhan is required to surrender before the jurisdictional court on October 21.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday did not express any opinion on the merits of the charges or the state's objections, leaving those issues open for consideration by the Calcutta High Court if Pradhan seeks further or regular bail.