The conflict between the two influential figures traces back to a disagreement over the foundation day of the student council, an event organized by Calcutta University. Shanta Dutta, who serves as the university’s acting Vice Chancellor, did not comply with Bratya Basu’s directives regarding the event, which led to growing tensions between them. Since that time, Dutta has been increasingly critical of the Education Minister, and the discord reached a boiling point when, on Saturday, Bratya Basu, the Trinamool Congress MLA from Dumdum, mocked Dutta by likening her to a crow and a peacock. These comments were seen as an attempt to belittle Dutta, perhaps in retaliation for her refusal to follow his instructions.

In response, Shanta Dutta took to a private news channel where she accused Bratya Basu of using his political power to undermine academic authority. She also recalled an incident involving Bratya Basu earlier this year at Jadavpur University, which she felt was pertinent to the current conflict.

The incident, which occurred in March 2023, was a flashpoint for widespread protests against the state government and its handling of education. Bratya Basu was accused of running over a student named Indranuj Roy during a protest at the university. The protests stemmed from deep-rooted dissatisfaction among students with the state’s educational policies and ministerial actions. Bratya Basu himself was injured during the episode, but many viewed his actions as reckless. Dutta pointed to this episode to question Basu’s leadership and draw attention to what she perceived as his failure to take responsibility for the consequences of his actions.

Dutta also took this opportunity to address the recent controversy surrounding examinations at Calcutta University. She explained that decisions regarding exams were made by the university’s syndicate, not by her alone. She expressed frustration that she was being personally attacked for a decision that involved multiple stakeholders. In her statement, Dutta clarified, “I am not acting alone in these matters. The decisions are collective, made by the syndicate, and yet, I am being unfairly targeted.”

Drawing parallels with the incident at Jadavpur University, Dutta recounted how, during that protest, students had barricaded her car for over six hours, leading to an incredibly tense standoff. She further detailed how one student had even climbed onto the bonnet of her car, disrupting the situation, and abusing her with offensive language. Despite this, Dutta emphasized that she did not instruct her driver to run over the student, calling attention to the fact that the protests were out of her control. However, her remarks made it clear that she felt the government had failed to address the root causes of such protests and had not taken action against those responsible for the escalation of violence.

Dutta’s comments regarding the handling of student protests were pointed. She criticized the government’s inability to curb the disruptive actions of protesting students and referenced the court’s order which had explicitly banned outsiders from entering the university premises. However, Dutta claimed that the students flouted this order by tearing the notice and even setting it on fire, an act she compared to “Muhammad bin Tughlaqi acts”—a historical reference used in Bengal to criticize policies perceived as despotic or irrational. Despite these acts of defiance, Dutta lamented that the government did nothing to hold these students accountable.

As the war of words continued, the issue also touched upon Abhirup Chakraborty, the General Secretary of the Trinamool Student Union (TMC), who had made pointed remarks regarding the exam issue. Dutta responded by announcing that Chakraborty would be banned from the university for five years, preventing him from registering for any higher education courses, such as MPhil or PhD, and blocking his application for any employment opportunities at Calcutta University. This measure was seen as a direct response to his provocative statements, as well as a message to student leaders who attempt to influence university policies through political means.

Dutta’s critique was not limited to student leaders; she also expressed her disappointment in the lack of action taken against Chakraborty by his own party leadership. In a sharply worded comment, she stated, “Had I seen any criticism or punishment from the party for his offensive remarks, I would have respected the action. But the days passed without any such response.”

Dutta also turned her attention to Bratya Basu’s behavior, particularly his media comments about the autonomy of the Vice Chancellor. The Education Minister had accused her of being too reliant on government directives, claiming that if the Vice Chancellor of a university were to act merely as a puppet of the government, it would be detrimental to the institutional autonomy of the university. In response, Dutta expressed her surprise at the Education Minister’s aggressive tone and lamented the “downfall of his standards”. She went so far as to suggest that if the party did not take action against him, the responsibility to address his misconduct would fall to the academic institutions, implying that someone had to step up to restore order.

In conclusion, the conflict between Shanta Dutta and Bratya Basu seems far from resolution. Academic freedom and institutional autonomy have become major points of contention as both parties continue to make their cases in public. The issue now extends beyond just a disagreement over university policies to a larger debate over the relationship between political forces and educational institutions. The question remains: will academic institutions like Calcutta University be able to maintain their independence from the heavy hand of politics, or will this struggle for power redefine the future of education in West Bengal?

The situation has raised serious questions about academic freedom and the role of political figures in shaping the education system, with many watching closely to see how these tensions will unfold in the coming months.

Chakraborty’s legal team asserts that Ghosh’s accusations have caused irreparable harm to the actor’s personal and professional reputation. The suit specifically refers to Ghosh’s allegations that Chakraborty was involved in several high-profile financial scandals, including the notorious Alchemist Group money laundering case, the Rose Valley Financial Scandal, and the Saradha Chit Fund Scandal. According to Chakraborty’s lawyers, these accusations are entirely unfounded and have been made with malicious intent, driven by political animosity.

In addition to the financial allegations, the defamation suit also highlights Ghosh’s claims about Chakraborty’s family. Ghosh reportedly accused Chakraborty’s son of being involved in a rape case, an allegation Chakraborty vehemently denies. Furthermore, the TMC spokesperson allegedly made remarks about Chakraborty’s wife, suggesting her involvement in dubious financial transactions. These comments, Chakraborty argues, were designed to tarnish his family’s reputation and harm their social standing.

The actor-turned-politician, who is also a recipient of the Padma Bhushan and Dadasaheb Phalke Lifetime Achievement Award, claims that the defamatory remarks have not only affected his personal life but have also jeopardized his career in films and advertising. He is now seeking legal redress in a bid to restore his and his family’s honor and to hold Ghosh accountable for the damage caused by his statements.

In a sharp counteraction, Kunal Ghosh has also taken legal steps, filing a criminal defamation suit against Mithun Chakraborty. Ghosh expressed his readiness to face the legal proceedings and indicated that he would seek a CBI investigation into the allegations he made against the actor. He further stated that he had already filed his own defamation suit against Chakraborty in the Bankshall Court, claiming that the actor had made defamatory remarks about him. Ghosh has also challenged Chakraborty’s claims, pointing out the actor’s history of political affiliations — from his early involvement with the Naxalite movement to his later affiliations with Shiv Sena, TMC, and now BJP. Ghosh argues that Chakraborty’s frequent changes in political allegiance raise questions about his credibility.

The situation has become a highly charged political and legal standoff, with both parties using the courtroom as a platform for their broader political battles. Ghosh’s remarks about Chakraborty’s political career — including accusations that the actor switched parties to avoid investigation — have only fueled the fire. Ghosh, who has been vocal about his criticism of Chakraborty’s political moves, emphasized that he was “waiting for this situation” to present documents related to the chit fund cases in court, and insisted that the CBI should investigate the matter further.

While the legal battle intensifies, it remains to be seen how the courts will rule on the defamation suits. The legal proceedings, which have been marked by intense public scrutiny, have yet to announce a hearing date, although sources suggest that the case may be brought before the court as early as next week.

This high-profile defamation dispute underscores the ongoing rivalry between two prominent political figures in West Bengal and highlights the complex interplay between politics and personal reputations in the state. It also sheds light on the intricacies of political discourse, where personal attacks and legal confrontations often spill over into public view, creating dramatic spectacles that resonate with the public and media alike.

As the case develops, the people of Bengal, and indeed the entire nation, will be watching closely to see how this legal drama unfolds in the courts.

Baby Chakraborty, KalimNews, September 4, 2025, Kolkata :  In a significant development for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in West Bengal, state president Shamik Bhattacharya has officially launched the ‘Karyakarta Darbar’ at the party’s historic headquarters at 6 Muralidhar Sen Lane. The initiative, designed to bridge the gap between the party leadership and its workers, is aimed at addressing the concerns of BJP members at the grassroots level.

Baby Chakraborty, KalimNews, September 2, 2025, Kolkata :  Abhishek Banerjee, the All India General Secretary of the Trinamool Congress (TMC), delivered a stern message of unity and cooperation to the leadership of the Ghatal organizational district of West Midnapore during a meeting in Kolkata on Monday. The meeting, held at Camac Street, came in the wake of internal disputes within the district leadership, particularly over the changes at the block level.

Present at the meeting were senior state ministers, including Manas Bhuiyan, Shiuli Saha, former minister Humayun Kabir, and Ajit Maiti, among other prominent leaders of the Ghatal district’s branch organizations. Abhishek Banerjee emphasized the importance of working cohesively to strengthen the party, particularly as leadership adjustments and changes at the block level are inevitable.

The main point of contention in the district is the ongoing dispute between key leaders, specifically Radhakant Maiti, the current chairperson of Ghatal, and Humayun Kabir, the current MLA of Debra. The tension between the two stems from their differing approaches to leadership at the block level. Radhakant, who was previously the MLA of Debra, has clashed with Humayun, and their relationship has been described as strained. The leaders’ disagreements have become particularly evident in the ongoing changes to the leadership in the blocks of Debra, Pingla, and Keshpur.

Moreover, Shiuli Saha, another influential leader from the district, has faced opposition from a section of the district over leadership changes in Keshpur. These internal conflicts have created a rift within the Ghatal organizational district, hindering the party’s unity and progress in the region.

According to several leaders present at the meeting, Abhishek Banerjee addressed these concerns directly. He acknowledged the differing proposals from the district’s leadership, including suggestions from Radhakant, Shiuli, Humayun, and Ajit. However, he made it clear that while these proposals would be considered, the final decision regarding leadership changes and organizational matters would rest with party leader Mamata Banerjee.

Abhishek’s call for unity was not just a directive but a firm reminder that the TMC must move forward together. “In the coming days, everyone, including Mamata Banerjee, will have to accept the necessary changes made at the block level. The party’s future depends on collective efforts and working together,” Abhishek asserted during the meeting.

The tensions within the Ghatal district are part of broader discussions around party unity and leadership restructuring within the TMC. With the party facing challenges in maintaining cohesion, Abhishek’s message was seen as a clear indication that internal conflicts must be resolved swiftly and with the party’s broader goals in mind.

As the party moves forward, the hope is that these internal disputes will be resolved and the leadership can unite to focus on the larger objective of strengthening the Trinamool Congress in West Bengal. 

Political Turmoil Erupts in West Bengal Assembly Over Army Incident on Mayor Road

Baby Chakraborty, KalimNews, September 2, 2025, Kolkata :  The West Bengal Assembly witnessed intense chaos and heated exchanges on Tuesday, following a controversial incident on Mayor Road involving the Indian Army. The political fallout from this incident sparked protests, suspensions, and fiery debates, leading to an escalating confrontation between the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) and the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

On Monday, the Indian Army reportedly dismantled a stage erected by the TMC for a Bengali language movement on Mayor Road, triggering widespread protests from the ruling party. The TMC strongly condemned the Army’s actions, accusing the BJP of orchestrating the event. TMC Supremo and West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee immediately visited the site, claiming that the BJP had used the Army to dismantle the stage and suppress the movement. She later described the incident as a form of ‘assault on the Bengali language.’

In the aftermath, the TMC organized protest meetings in various districts across the state on Tuesday, and the issue was brought to the floor of the Assembly. Tensions escalated when Suvendu Adhikari, the leader of the opposition, raised slogans in support of the Indian Army, further aggravating the situation. The Assembly witnessed an uproar as members of the ruling party and opposition clashed over the incident, with TMC lawmakers expressing anger at the BJP’s stance.

Suvendu’s action in favor of the Indian Army led to his suspension from the Assembly. The Speaker of the House, Biman Banerjee, was forced to call for marshals to remove him from the session after he continued chanting slogans despite repeated warnings to cease. The suspension of the opposition leader resulted in a walkout by BJP legislators, who left the Assembly in protest.

Speaking to the media outside the Assembly, Suvendu Adhikari strongly criticized his suspension, asserting, “I have been suspended again. I was suspended for speaking in favor of the Army. I feel proud of the Indian Army.” He further claimed that his suspension was unlawful and that he was unjustly removed from the Assembly for raising his voice in support of the nation’s armed forces.

As the Assembly debate continued, tensions reached new heights with inflammatory comments from both sides. State Minister Bratya Basu described the Army’s actions on Mayor Road as reminiscent of the violence on March 25, 1971, during the Bangladesh Liberation War, comparing the incident to the Pakistani Army’s atrocities. This remark, in particular, sparked further outrage among opposition members, who accused the TMC of politicizing the issue for electoral gain.

In response, Minister Firhad Hakim called the BJP an “anti-Bengali” party, fueling the ongoing war of words between the two parties. BJP lawmakers, in turn, vociferously defended the actions of the Army, and Suvendu continued to raise slogans like “Indian Army Zindabad” (Long Live the Indian Army), solidifying his position as a staunch supporter of the military.

After the session, BJP leaders expressed outrage at what they described as an “undemocratic” suspension, accusing the ruling party of attempting to stifle their voices. Suvendu, in particular, remained defiant, reiterating his pride in the Army and his firm belief that the incident on Mayor Road needed to be thoroughly investigated.

The political controversy shows no signs of abating, with both sides dug in and accusations flying in all directions. With Assembly sessions in turmoil and protests breaking out across the state, the political standoff between the TMC and BJP is set to dominate West Bengal’s political landscape for the foreseeable future.

Although the state BJP leadership, including figures like State President Shamik Bhattacharya, share a consensus on Ghosh’s value, it is ultimately the central leadership in Delhi that will determine his future role. The ongoing question in political circles is whether Delhi will re-appoint the former state president to the state committee or assign him to another crucial post.

In a recent meeting at the state BJP office in Salt Lake, Ghosh, in his signature candid style, declared that despite lacking an official party position and facing the impending end of his tenure as MP in 2024, he still maintains his relevance in Bengal’s political arena. “I still have a price in the market,” Ghosh remarked, signaling that he has not been sidelined completely, despite his diminishing visibility. His consistent assertion that he has not lost his relevance in the state speaks volumes about his self-assuredness and potential political maneuvering.

However, the critical question remains: Is Dilip Ghosh about to receive a new political responsibility? Will the party grant him a place back in the central or state committee? Responding to this uncertainty in the past, Ghosh stated, “Let’s see how the party wants. I have previously contested in the assembly and Lok Sabha, and I will do whatever is needed for the party’s needs.” His willingness to adapt to the party’s demands suggests that Ghosh is keeping his options open, awaiting a potential political reshuffle.

The political dynamics within the state BJP have certainly shifted since Shamik Bhattacharya assumed the role of state president. Bhattacharya’s leadership has elevated the importance of veteran party members, and one of his clear objectives is to integrate long-serving workers back into the party’s fold. Given this context, it is highly possible that Ghosh, as a prominent leader with years of experience, could be reintroduced into the political fold.

As one of the party’s strongest and most influential leaders in Bengal, Dilip Ghosh’s political trajectory is far from over. With the next assembly elections on the horizon, many are watching closely to see whether Ghosh will once again be at the forefront of West Bengal BJP’s political strategy. The coming months will likely reveal whether Ghosh’s political influence will be revived or if he will continue to play a more diminished role in state politics.

The controversy erupted on Friday when Rakesh Singh and his supporters were seen engaging in a violent attack on the Pradesh Congress office, setting fire to photographs of Congress leaders, including Rahul Gandhi, and burning the party’s flags. The event has sparked widespread backlash, with critics accusing Singh of crossing a line that could damage the BJP’s public image. However, the most significant fallout appears to be within the party itself.

As the incident gained attention, the state BJP, under pressure from various quarters, distanced itself from Singh. State President Shamik Bhattacharya, who had been under political pressure, condemned the actions, making it clear that the BJP does not support the burning of any political party’s flag. “This was not an approved program of the party,” Bhattacharya asserted, signaling his firm stance against the attack.

Meanwhile, Shuvendu Adhikari, who has often been seen as a guiding force for Rakesh Singh within the BJP, also distanced himself from the controversy. In his response, Adhikari confirmed that Singh is a BJP member but made it clear that the party does not condone his actions. “I support what our state president Shamik Bhattacharya has said about this incident. This was not an approved program of the party,” Adhikari stated, further signaling his discomfort with Singh’s actions.

The growing tension between Rakesh Singh and key BJP leaders has underscored the factional struggles within the state unit of the party. Singh’s close ties to Shuvendu Adhikari have long been noted in political circles, and his sudden isolation raises questions about internal power dynamics within the Bengal BJP. The lack of support from both Adhikari and Bhattacharya highlights the deepening divide among party leaders, especially as the state prepares for the upcoming elections.

Rakesh Singh, who was once seen as an influential figure in the party, now faces a precarious position. His political future seems uncertain as he finds himself increasingly isolated, with his recent actions seemingly out of step with the party’s official stance. As the situation continues to unfold, it remains to be seen whether Singh will be able to mend his relationship with the party leadership or if this marks the beginning of his political decline within the BJP.