The Calcutta High Court told the West Bengal government’s counsel on Tuesday that Congress candidate Milan Pradhan should be allowed to contest the election if granted bail. Milan Pradhan is a candidate in the Nandigram by-election. He has been arrested in five criminal cases and is currently in judicial custody. On Saturday, the Haldia Sub-Divisional Court sent him to judicial custody until 3 October in four cases. These cases relate to Nandigram in 2007. On Monday, the Contai Court sent him to 14 days’ judicial custody in a nearly two-decade-old case under the Arms Act. The by-election in Nandigram will be held on 6 October. Campaigning will end on 4 October, and the votes will be counted on 9 October. Arrested in five cases Ayan Bhattacharya, the Congress candidate’s lawyer, had said that he would challenge the Contai Court’s order in the Calcutta High Court. Milan Pradhan on Monday sought protection from coercive police action in six cases. During the hearing of the petition, the state government told the court that five of these cases had been withdrawn by the previous government. The state government also said that Pradhan was not wanted in the remaining case. Pradhan’s lawyer said that he had been arrested on 18 September. According to the lawyer, the cases were registered during the anti-land acquisition agitation in Nandigram in 2007. He alleged that Pradhan was arrested after receiving support from the Trinamool Congress (TMC) faction led by Mamata Banerjee for the by-election. Justice Saugat Bhattacharya orally told Additional Advocate General Rajdeep Majumdar, who was representing the state government, that if Pradhan was granted bail, he should be allowed to contest the election properly. State government provided details of 11 cases Additional Advocate General told Justice Bhattacharya’s court that there were a total of 11 criminal cases against Pradhan. He said that Pradhan was not wanted in the six cases for which Pradhan’s lawyer had sought protection. Majumdar said that the previous government had withdrawn five of these six cases. He also said that Pradhan was not an accused in another case registered at Nandigram police station. Justice Bhattacharya said that, in such a situation, there was no need to pass any order in these six cases. The court directed that the matter be listed for further hearing on 12 October. Pradhan’s lawyer told the court that he was not seeking relief in the five cases in which Pradhan had already been arrested. Police described the warrant proceedings as routine On the other hand, the Additional Advocate General said that Pradhan had been arrested on the basis of a warrant issued by the lower court. The warrant had been issued in a 2007 criminal case and had been pending since 2021. He said that when an election is held in an area, the concerned police officer is responsible for acting on all arrest warrants before polling, in accordance with the Election Commission’s guidelines. The Additional Advocate General said that in this case, the other accused against whom warrants were pending had also been arrested. Pradhan’s lawyer sought information from the police on whether any criminal cases other than the 11 cases had been registered against him. The orders of both lower courts have almost eliminated Pradhan’s opportunity to campaign in person. He will be able to campaign only if he is granted bail. By-election after officer vacates seat Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari won the Nandigram seat in the 2026 Assembly election. He also won the Bhabanipur seat in Kolkata. After this, Suvendu Adhikari vacated the Nandigram seat. The Election Commission announced a by-election for the seat. Nandigram has held a special place in West Bengal politics. In 2007, Suvendu Adhikari helped the anti-land acquisition movement led by Mamata Banerjee. The movement played a major role in the Left Front government’s ouster from power in West Bengal in 2011. Post navigation Sidharth and Tamannaah’s ‘Vvaan’ embroiled in controversy:Singer alleges song used without permission in trailer; says, ‘Remove my song’ SC upholds ban on anticipatory bail under SC/ST Act:Dismisses PIL challenging the 2018 amendment; says no review necessary