HC counters ‘influential’ argument, grants shield to Abhishek
Times of India | 12 August 2026
Kolkata: Refusing to accept Bengal govt’s argument that Trinamool MP Abhishek Banerjee’s custodial interrogation was necessary because he was influential, Calcutta High Court on Tuesday extended his interim protection from arrest in four FIRs filed against him since the May 4 poll results till Aug 31.
“If he (Banerjee) is so influential, how is his office at Amtala being demolished? Can any influential person’s office be demolished in his own constituency?” Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya asked advocate general Surajit Nath Mitra. Mitra, however, argued that the property was illegally occupied and did not belong to Leaps & Bounds – the firm where Banerjee is a director.
The judge’s question had come after de facto complainant Abhijit Das’s counsel Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee argued that Banerjee was a “super influential” person. “If he is outside custody, no sane man will be able to go and depose,” Chatterjee submitted.
Justice Bhattacharyya observed, “Now times have changed. If your client would have filed a complaint during that period, it would have been germane. Now it is not. Custodial interrogation is not necessary, due to change in political disposition there is a change of scenario…”
Banerjee had moved HC, seeking a quashing of four FIRs filed against him for land grabbing and some remarks made in election speeches at Bhawanipur, Siliguri, Bishnupur and Kalitala. The state had disclosed that there are 16 FIRs pending against him.
While saying that the court would not interfere with investigation at this stage, the judge went on to say, “Before the era of the present political dispensation, could this have been done? I am asking everybody. This goes to show that the situation has changed… Perhaps the demolition process started on Friday evening. All proceedings are being started on Friday evening and the court is having to sit on weekends.”
Reserving the final order on the quashing, Justice Bhattacharyya granted the protection to Banerjee in the four cases, the MP’s counsel Arka Kumar Nag said. Police authorities were directed to supply copies of all FIRs and complaints.
Justice Bhattacharya also noted that Das had lost elections twice to Banerjee and questioned the timing of the FIRs. “When was this complaint filed?... All after May 4, declaration of results.” The judge asked ASG SV Raju, “Are these not relevant considerations at the time of passing an order?”
Raju replied, “Delay (in filing FIR) in this case is explainable because his (Banerjee’s) party was in office and nobody would register the FIR. Prima facie offences are serious and economic offences have been made out.”
The state, represented by ASG Raju, AG Mitra and AAG Bilwadal Bhattacharyya, stressed that the court can’t pass an interim order on a petition which had clubbed multiple criminal cases.