Archive · 1 Sep 2026
Calcutta High Court Questions PIL Over Mamata Bangladesh Remarks
The Calcutta High Court is examining a petition about comments allegedly made by Mamata Banerjee.
The comments concerned the murder of Bangladesh activist Sharif Osman Hadi.
The petitioner said the comments could affect India’s national interest.
The petitioner also said the case should be considered under the Official Secrets Act.
Banerjee’s lawyers said no violation of that law had been demonstrated.
The court questioned whether the case properly qualified as a public interest litigation.
It also warned that PILs should not be used merely to gain attention.
The case will be considered again on September 14.
The Calcutta High Court questioned whether a petition concerning Mamata Banerjee’s alleged remarks was maintainable as a PIL.
The petitioner alleged that Banerjee commented on the December 2025 murder of Bangladesh activist Sharif Osman Hadi.
The petitioner claimed the remarks were made at a political rally in Kolkata on June 2 and affected India’s national interest.
Banerjee’s lawyers argued that the petitioner had not shown any violation of the Official Secrets Act.
The court scheduled further consideration for September 14 after the petitioner’s lawyer sought time to obtain instructions.
- Who
- The Calcutta High Court, Mamata Banerjee, the petitioner, Banerjee’s lawyers, and the West Bengal government were involved.
- What
- The court questioned the maintainability of a PIL concerning Banerjee’s alleged remarks about the murder of Bangladesh activist Sharif Osman Hadi.
- When
- The alleged remarks were said to have been made on June 2; the activist was reported murdered in December 2025, and the case will next be considered on September 14.
- Where
- The alleged remarks were reportedly made at a political rally in Kolkata; the matter was heard by the Calcutta High Court.
- Why
- The petitioner claimed the remarks affected India’s national interest and involved the Official Secrets Act.
Petitioner’s claims
Banerjee and state’s responses
Whether the PIL should proceed
Petitioner’s claims
The petitioner sought court action over alleged remarks that he said affected India’s national interest and invoked the Official Secrets Act.
Banerjee and state’s responses
Banerjee’s lawyers said no violation of the Official Secrets Act had been demonstrated, while the court questioned whether the petition was maintainable as a PIL.
Events at the rally
Petitioner’s claims
The petitioner claimed the remarks were made during a political rally in Kolkata on June 2.
Banerjee and state’s responses
The state said an inquiry found that the petitioner was not present at the venue and that no untoward activity was reported there.
- Court
- Calcutta High Court
- Presiding judge
- Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty
- Other judge
- Justice Atarup Banerjee
- Subject of petition
- Mamata Banerjee’s alleged comments about the murder of Bangladesh activist Sharif Osman Hadi
- Petitioner’s claim
- The remarks affected India’s national interest and implicated the Official Secrets Act
- Response from Banerjee’s lawyers
- They said the petitioner had not shown that any provision of the Official Secrets Act was violated
- Next hearing
- September 14