The division bench, presided over by Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty, asked why the petition should be treated as a PIL.
The court verbally observed that to gain attention, “PILs are nowadays being used as a special tool or weapon”.
The division bench, also comprising Justice Atarup Banerjee, asked how the petition was maintainable as a public interest litigation.
The petitioner alleged that Banerjee made some controversial remarks over the murder of Bangladesh activist Sharif Osman Hadi in Dhaka in December, 2025, which he claimed had an impact on India’s national interest.
The petitioner claimed before the division bench that the comments were allegedly made on June 2 during a political rally in Kolkata, while maintaining that the former chief minister is bound by the Official Secrets Act.Banerjee’s counsels Kalyan Bandopadhyay and Arka Kumar Nag claimed before the division bench that the petitioner could not show how any provision of the Official Secrets Act had been violated.
Read more: FIR filed against Mamata Banerjee over ‘violation’ of Calcutta HC order on TMCP meeting
Additional Advocate General Rajdeep Majumder, representing the state, submitted before the court that an inquiry confirmed the petitioner was not present at the venue and that no untoward activity was reported there.
On a prayer by the petitioner’s counsel for accommodation to avail instructions from his client, the court fixed the matter for further consideration on September 14.
