Congress Candidate Milan Pradhan Denied Interim Bail Despite Court Order Allowing Him to Contest Nandigram Bypoll

KOLKATA: The Congress-nominated candidate from Nandigram assembly constituency in West Bengal’s Purba Medinipur district for the upcoming bypoll scheduled on October 6 was not granted bail even on Friday. Hearings in connection with bail petitions in four cases have been held in the Calcutta High Court, while the remaining two cases in which he has also appealed for bail are pending for hearings. Justice Tirthankar Ghosh on Friday said hearings on bail petitions in connection with other cases would be held on Monday. The court would issue an order on Monday after completion of hearings on the two cases. The High Court on Thursday asked the the upcoming bypoll from the high-voltage Nandigram seat and directed the state police not to take any steps against him in a 2007 criminal case till October 12. The court verbally asked the state to allow him to contest the Nandigram byelection. Justice Ghosh on Thursday observed, “Allow Milan Pradhan to contest the election. I am giving him an interim bail so that he can take part in the election. The remaining matter will depend on the case lying with the court.” The next hearing of the case will be held at 4 am on Friday, he said. But Milan was not granted interim bail even on Friday. Seeking his bail, Milan’s lawyers on Wednesday had moved the High Court. They urged the court, requesting its permission to file a petition and thereafter an urgent hearing for their client Milan Pradhan, who is a contestant for the Nandigram bypoll. The court allowed them to file a bail petition for him. Justice Ghosh on Thursday made the observation asking the state government to allow the Congress candidate to contest the election. On the other hand, a Calcutta High Court division bench on Friday set aside a single-bench order granting relief to the Congress candidate from coercive action in a 2007 criminal case, expressing surprise over the directive since he was in judicial custody in the matter. The division bench, led by Chief Justice Ravindra Vithalrao Ghuge, held that in criminal law, there was no provision for such interim protection for an accused. It said an accused can apply for anticipatory bail if he is apprehensive of arrest or can seek bail after being held.