Sandip Kuila Vs the Election Commission of India and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sandip Kuila Vs the Election Commission of India and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to direct political parties, mainly the Bharatiya Janata Party and the All India Trinamool Congress, to deposit the charges for the central and state police protection enjoyed by their members during political activities. +3 more

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition involves disputed questions of fact, and travelling into the area to adjudicate such factual dispute would be a wrongful exercise of public interest jurisdiction.

Key takeaways

In the said conspectus, it cannot be ruled out that the petitioner has a private interest.ratio¶18
For the reasons discussed, the Court was unable to grant the relief as prayed for and the writ petition was dismissed.ratio¶19
The dismissal will not prevent the petitioner from approaching the appropriate forum, if so advised.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Public interest litigation (WPA(P) 110 of 2026, Calcutta High Court, decided July 3, 2026) by Sandip Kuila, a social activist appearing in person, before a Division Bench of Tapabrata Chakraborty, A.C.J. and Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J. The petitioner sought directions (i) that political parties — mainly the Bharatiya Janata Party and the All India Trinamool Congress — be directed to deposit the charges for the central and state police protection enjoyed by their members during political activities, and (ii) that all individuals, including politicians, having threat perception and need for security arrangements be treated on the same evaluation parameter so as to avoid inequality, bias, nepotism and arbitrariness. He alleged infringement of his fundamental rights, deprivation of his source of livelihood, and non-response by the authorities to his representations (representation dated 15th February, 2026; response of the Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs vide memo dated 20th January, 2025; communication by the Government of West Bengal vide memo dated 10th February, 2025 to the Director General and Inspector General of Police, West Bengal). Holding: the petition, which clubbed several issues (lack of security of the public at large, police sponsored extortion, misuse of State fund and diversion of statutory resources for political purpose), involved disputed questions of fact, adjudication of which would be a wrongful exercise of public interest jurisdiction; further, the petitioner's private interest could not be ruled out. Writ petition dismissed; no order as to costs; liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum, if so advised.

July 3, 2026 Sl. No.9 Court No.1 s.biswas

WPA(P) 110 of 2026

Sandip Kuila vs.

The Election Commission of India and others

Mr. Sandip Kuila

... the petitioner (in person) Ms. Anamika Pandey ... for the ECI

Ms. Amrita Pandey

... for the Union of India Mr. Ajit Kumar Mishra Mr. Gopal Krishna Sarkar Mr. Milind Mohul Ghosh

... for the State

The present Public Interest Litigation writ petition has been preferred inter alia praying for issuance of necessary direction upon the respondents to discharge their public duties and ‘to direct the political parties to deposit the charges for the security arrangement of huge numbers of members of political parties, mainly the Bharatiya Janata Party and the All India Trinamool Congress, as they are enjoying central and state police protection respectively during their political activities’ and ‘to treat all individuals, including politicians, having threat perception and need for security arrangements, on the same evaluation parameter, so as to avoid inequality, bias, nepotism and arbitrariness’.

2

Mr. Sandip Kuila, the petitioner appearing in person submits that the fundamental and other valuable rights of the petitioner as well as other similarly placed persons are being infringed. As a social activist he has preferred the present writ petition to avail protection of persons similarly situated with him, who are jobless, idle and have no means to earn their livelihood. Such grievance was ventilated to the authorities by a representation dated 15^th February, 2026, but no steps have been taken.

Drawing our attention to a memo dated 10^th February, 2025, the petitioner submits that a detailed representation submitted by him regarding his security arrangements was responded to by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs vide memo dated 20^th January, 2025 and referred to the Assistant Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Home and Hill Affairs Department, who in turn vide memo dated 10^th February, 2025 communicated the issue to the Director General and Inspector General of Police, West Bengal but still there had been no response from the concerned authorities.

We have heard Mr. Kuila and considered the materials on record.

In the writ petition several issues have been clubbed together alleging lack of security of the public at large,

3

police sponsored extortion, misuse of State fund and diversion of statutory resources for political purpose. The petition involves disputed questions of fact and travelling into the area to adjudicate such factual dispute would be a wrongful exercise of public interest jurisdiction.

The petitioner has also alleged that his fundamental rights have been infringed and he had been deprived of his source of livelihood. In the said conspectus, it cannot be ruled out that the petitioner has a private interest.

For the reasons discussed above, we are unable to grant the relief as prayed for and the writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

It is made clear that such dismissal will not prevent the petitioner from approaching the appropriate forum, if so advised.

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, A.C.J.)