Fresh legal troubles appear to be mounting for Trinamool Congress national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee after a new complaint was filed against him in Siliguri over remarks allegedly made during the 2026 West Bengal Assembly election campaign. The complaint accuses the TMC leader of making provocative statements that were capable of creating fear, unrest, and political tension among the public through speeches that were widely circulated on social media platforms.
According to sources familiar with the development, the complaint was lodged by Sanjay Kumar Singhal, a businessman and former president of the Siliguri Merchant Association. Singhal submitted a written complaint at the cyber police station operating under the Siliguri Police Commissionerate. In his complaint, he alleged that speeches delivered by Abhishek Banerjee during the election campaign and subsequently shared through various social media channels had the potential to disturb public order and create an atmosphere of uncertainty among ordinary citizens.
The complainant reportedly argued that the circulation of these speeches and videos could influence public sentiment and contribute to political tensions within the state. He maintained that public representatives, particularly elected lawmakers, should exercise caution in their public statements and ensure that their remarks remain within the framework of the law.
The complaint specifically cited several campaign events during which the allegedly objectionable statements were made. Among them were a rally held at Nandigram on March 25, 2026, a public meeting and roadshow conducted in Maheshtala on April 27, 2026, and another election gathering organised in Arambagh. The complainant claimed that remarks made during these events formed the basis of his allegations.
Speaking about the matter, Singhal questioned whether a Member of Parliament should be making statements that he believed were inconsistent with legal norms. Referring to one of Banerjee's speeches delivered during the election campaign, he alleged that the TMC leader had invoked the name of the Union Home Minister while making controversial remarks and argued that such statements deserved scrutiny.
Singhal further contended that no individual, regardless of political influence or position, should be allowed to openly challenge constitutional authorities without consequences. He raised concerns about whether elections could truly be conducted in a free and fear-free environment if such remarks were permitted without action from the relevant authorities. According to him, the Election Commission has a responsibility to ensure that the electoral process remains fair, peaceful, and free from intimidation.
The filing of the complaint coincided with another significant development involving the Trinamool Congress leader. On the same day, a team from the West Bengal Crime Investigation Department (CID) arrived at Abhishek Banerjee's residence and served him with a fresh notice related to an investigation into his alleged provocative remarks made during the 2026 election campaign.
The CID is currently handling the probe after a First Information Report (FIR) was registered against Banerjee in the Bidhanagar Commissionerate concerning statements he allegedly made during the election period. Investigators are examining whether those remarks violated legal provisions and whether they had the potential to disturb public order.
According to reports, CID officials waited outside Banerjee's residence for several hours before he eventually emerged and accepted a copy of the notice. The development marked another step in the ongoing investigation and indicated that authorities are continuing to pursue the matter.
Reacting to the action taken against him, Banerjee strongly criticised what he described as unequal treatment by law enforcement agencies. He questioned why legal proceedings had been initiated against him over a statement in which he allegedly said that DJs would be played after May 4, while no similar action had been taken against senior leaders of rival political parties for remarks that he considered far more aggressive.
Specifically, Banerjee referred to comments allegedly made by Union Home Minister Amit Shah during the election campaign. He argued that if authorities believed his statements warranted an FIR, then similar standards should have been applied to remarks in which political opponents allegedly threatened Trinamool Congress workers.
Banerjee maintained that when those comments were made, the Election Commission was responsible for maintaining law and order during the election period. According to him, no action was taken at that time because doing so would have required authorities to proceed against leaders from other political parties as well.
The TMC leader further alleged that the case against him had been initiated only after political circumstances changed in the state. He suggested that the legal action reflected selective enforcement rather than an impartial application of the law and announced that he intended to challenge what he described as discriminatory treatment before the courts.
According to Banerjee, if authorities choose to take action against one political leader for campaign remarks, then the same standards must be applied uniformly across the political spectrum. He argued that fairness and consistency are essential principles in any democratic system and that selective investigations undermine public confidence in institutions.
The latest complaint and the CID notice add to the growing legal and political challenges facing Abhishek Banerjee. While investigators continue examining the content of his speeches and the circumstances under which the remarks were made, the issue is also becoming part of a broader political debate over freedom of speech, electoral conduct, and the impartial application of laws during and after election campaigns.
As the investigations proceed, both the complaint filed in Siliguri and the CID inquiry are expected to remain under close public and political scrutiny. The outcome of these proceedings could have significant implications not only for Banerjee personally but also for the wider political discourse surrounding campaign rhetoric and accountability in West Bengal.
