Nandigram bypoll: Calcutta HC reserves verdict on BJP candidate affidavit row
Synopsis
With polling just days away, the Calcutta High Court has reserved judgment on a Congress petition alleging that the BJP's Nandigram bypoll candidate claimed to have passed her secondary exams before she was born — a discrepancy that, if upheld, could unseat her from the race entirely.
Key Takeaways
The Calcutta High Court's single-judge Bench of Justice Krishna Rao reserved judgment on 25 September 2026 on a petition challenging BJP candidate Hasirani Rath's affidavit.
The petition, filed by Congress leader Ritzu Ghosal , alleges that Rath's affidavit states she is over 60 years old but also claims she passed her secondary exam in 1965 — before her stated birth year of 1966 .
The Election Commission of India (ECI) argued that challenges should have been raised during the nomination scrutiny stage, not after.
The BJP candidate's counsel called the discrepancy unintentional and urged the court not to bar her candidacy.
Polling for the Nandigram and Rejinagar Assembly bye-elections is scheduled for 6 October , with vote counting on 9 October .
A single-judge Bench of the Calcutta High Court on Friday, 25 September 2026, reserved its judgment after hearing a petition filed by the West Bengal Pradesh Congress Committee challenging the nomination affidavit of Hasirani Rath, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) candidate for the 6 October bye-election to the Nandigram Assembly constituency in East Midnapore district. The petition alleges self-contradictory details in the affidavit concerning the candidate's age and educational qualifications.
What the Petition Alleges
The petition was filed before Justice Krishna Rao by Congress leader and senior advocate Ritzu Ghosal. At the heart of the challenge is a specific inconsistency: while Rath's affidavit reportedly states she is over 60 years old, it simultaneously claims she passed her secondary examination in 1965 — a date that, according to the petitioner, predates the year of birth indicated in the same document.
'This means she was born in 1966. In the same affidavit, she had claimed that she passed the secondary examination in 1965. How could she pass the secondary examination before she was born?' Ghosal argued before the court. He contended the information was 'practically impossible' and sought cancellation of Rath's nomination. The petitioner also alleged that the Election Commission of India (ECI) failed to act despite having scrutinised the affidavit during the filing process.
ECI and BJP Counter-Arguments
Counsel for the ECI argued that the Returning Officer routinely checks candidate affidavits during the scrutiny stage. Since no formal objection was raised at that point, the commission's counsel maintained the window for legal challenge had effectively closed. 'This question could have been raised in a Public Interest Litigation. But since no objection was raised at the time of filing the nomination or during the scrutiny, no action can be taken now,' the ECI's counsel argued.
The BJP candidate's counsel echoed this position, stressing that objections should have been raised during the prescribed period. 'Now the court cannot take any action against the candidate. Moreover, this is not a deliberate mistake. Therefore, my client should be given a chance,' Rath's counsel told the court.
Court's Decision to Reserve Judgment
After hearing arguments from all parties, Justice Krishna Rao reserved the verdict without setting an immediate date for pronouncement. Given that polling in both the Nandigram and Rejinagar Assembly bye-elections is scheduled for 6 October, with vote counting set for 9 October, the timing of any ruling carries significant electoral weight.
Electoral Context and Stakes
Nandigram holds outsized political symbolism in West Bengal — it was the site of the 2021 Assembly election battle between Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee of the All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) and then-BJP candidate Suvendu Adhikari, which drew national attention. The current bypoll, while a lower-stakes contest, remains a barometer of the BJP's organisational strength in the constituency. Any court order unseating the BJP's candidate days before polling would be an extraordinary pre-election intervention — making the reserved judgment one to watch closely.
The outcome of Justice Rao's ruling is now expected to determine whether Hasirani Rath contests the bye-election as scheduled or faces disqualification on affidavit grounds.
Point of View
But it sits uncomfortably alongside the commission's stated mandate of ensuring clean and transparent elections. Nandigram's symbolic weight amplifies the stakes; any ruling that removes the BJP candidate days before polling would be exceptional, and the court's decision to reserve rather than dismiss outright suggests Justice Rao is taking the discrepancy seriously. The case is a reminder that affidavit scrutiny at the filing stage remains a weak link in India's electoral process.
NationPress
25 Sept 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Nandigram bypoll affidavit controversy about?
The controversy centres on alleged self-contradictions in the nomination affidavit of BJP candidate Hasirani Rath for the Nandigram Assembly bye-election on 6 October. The Congress petition claims the affidavit states she is over 60 years old but also lists her secondary examination pass year as 1965, which would predate her indicated birth year of 1966.
Who filed the petition in the Calcutta High Court?
The petition was filed by the West Bengal Pradesh Congress Committee, represented by Congress leader and senior advocate Ritzu Ghosal, before the single-judge Bench of Justice Krishna Rao at the Calcutta High Court.
What did the Election Commission argue in court?
The ECI's counsel argued that objections to a candidate's affidavit must be raised during the nomination scrutiny stage before the Returning Officer. Since no formal objection was lodged at that point, the commission contended that the court cannot take action on the matter now.
When is the verdict expected and why does timing matter?
Justice Krishna Rao reserved the verdict without specifying a pronouncement date. Timing is critical because polling for the Nandigram and Rejinagar bye-elections is scheduled for 6 October 2026, and a ruling unseating the BJP candidate before that date would have direct electoral consequences.
What is the significance of Nandigram in West Bengal politics?
Nandigram gained national attention during the 2021 West Bengal Assembly elections when Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee contested the seat against BJP's Suvendu Adhikari in a closely watched battle. The constituency remains a politically sensitive flashpoint for both the TMC and the BJP in the state.
