An unprecedented scene unfolded on Thursday morning at the Calcutta High Court, as former Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee made a rare courtroom appearance dressed in traditional black legal robes. Arriving at around 10:15 am, her presence in advocate’s attire drew widespread attention, marking a sharp departure from conventional political appearances.
However, as Banerjee exited the court premises, the situation outside quickly turned chaotic. Police personnel struggled to manage the crowd and clear a path for her vehicle. Slogans of “Jai Shri Ram” and “Chor, Chor” were raised by sections of the crowd, further intensifying the already tense atmosphere.
This is not Banerjee’s first appearance before a court in recent months. Earlier this year, she had presented arguments before the Supreme Court of India regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter list exercise in Bengal. At that time, she appeared as an ordinary citizen and not in legal attire. Following her recent electoral defeat, Thursday’s appearance marked her first in court dressed as a lawyer.
Banerjee presented her arguments before a bench headed by Chief Justice Sujay Pal in connection with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning alleged post-poll violence across the state. The petition was filed by Shirshanya Banerjee, son of Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Kalyan Banerjee, who had contested and lost from the Uttarpara Assembly constituency.
The PIL alleges widespread attacks on party offices and physical assaults on TMC workers across multiple districts following the elections. Banerjee appeared in court specifically to argue in support of this petition, while Kalyan was also present during the proceedings.
In her submission, Banerjee stated that she had enrolled with the Bar Council in 1985 and sought permission to present arguments. She alleged that families belonging to Scheduled Castes, as well as members of different religious communities, had been targeted. “Newlywed couples and their families have been driven out of their homes… People are being attacked daily, and normal life has been completely disrupted. So far, 10 people have been killed in this post-poll violence,” she said.
She further claimed that threats had been issued even at her residence and that law and order had deteriorated significantly. “Homes and offices are being looted. We have photographic evidence. This is not a ‘Bulldozer State’; it is a state of rich culture. Please provide us with protection,” she urged the court.
Responding to the petition, Additional Solicitor General Ashok Chakraborty argued that such petitions must be backed by concrete evidence. “Proper research is essential before filing a petition of this nature. It must be substantiated with specific instances,” he said.
Counsel representing the police, Dheeraj Trivedi, also questioned the claims made in the petition. He stated that the allegations required thorough verification and could not be accepted at face value. “The police must ascertain whether these incidents are directly linked to post-poll violence. Investigations are ongoing, and the police are not idle,” he said.
Referring to a recent incident at Hogg Market, he added that nine individuals had already been arrested and an FIR registered, indicating that law enforcement agencies were actively responding to complaints.
The matter remains under judicial consideration, as the High Court examines the competing claims regarding law and order in the aftermath of the elections.