Calcutta HC Admits Mamata Banerjee’s Petition Against Suvendu Adhikari’s Bhabanipur Win

Calcutta High Court Admits Mamata Banerjee’s Petition Challenging Suvendu Adhikari’s Bhabanipur Victory

The Calcutta High Court has admitted the election petition in Mamata Banerjee v. Suvendu Adhikari and Others, challenging Adhikari’s election from the Bhabanipur Assembly constituency. The Court also ordered the immediate preservation of EVMs, VVPAT machines and CCTV footage connected with the election.

Justice Gaurang Kanth refused to reject the petition at the preliminary stage after finding that it disclosed a valid cause of action. The Court observed that the petition had complied with the requirements prescribed under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Dictating the order in open court, Justice Kanth said, “This Court is satisfied that the election petition complied with the Representation of the People Act. No ground exists for dismissal.”

The petition was filed by former West Bengal Chief Minister and Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee against the election of Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari. Banerjee has questioned the result declared from Bhabanipur during the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections.

While considering the request for interim protection, the Court distinguished the preservation of election material from other forms of interim relief. It noted that the evidence could become unavailable or lose its value unless immediate protective directions were issued.

“The prayer for preservation of CCTV footage, EVMs and VVPAT machines stands on a different footing. CCTV footage is electronic evidence that may get lost due to overwriting and EVMs and VVPAT are material evidence relevant to the issue raised here,” the Court observed.

The Election Commission of India, the Chief Electoral Officer of West Bengal and the Returning Officer concerned were consequently directed to preserve the relevant records until further orders. The materials include CCTV footage from the counting process and the EVM and VVPAT units used in the constituency.

The Court clarified that preservation would not cause prejudice to the respondents or amount to expressing any opinion on the validity of the election result. It added that failure to secure the records could result in the permanent loss of evidence relevant to the dispute.

“Preservation of such material would neither prejudice the respondent nor amount to adjudication on merits. Failure to preserve the same may lead to irreparable loss of evidence,” the Court said.

The authorities have been specifically restrained from erasing, overwriting, destroying, tampering with, redeploying or opening the preserved materials without prior permission from the High Court.

Senior advocate Kalyan Bandopadhyay, appearing for Banerjee, requested an early decision in the matter. He submitted, “I appeal for this matter to be decided as expeditiously as possible.”

The petition, registered as Election Petition No. 9 of 2026, is expected to be listed again after eight weeks. The preservation order will continue to operate while the election challenge remains pending.