Hate Speech Case: Mahua Moitra gets interim relief from the High Court

July 21, 2026

Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Mahua Moitra has received interim relief from the Calcutta High Court in an alleged ‘hate speech’ case. The court has stayed any coercive police action against her until October 5. However, the court clarified that this relief remains valid only as long as Moitra fully cooperates with the investigation and adheres to all conditions set by the court. While this order currently halts her arrest or other coercive measures, the investigation will continue.

Moitra had filed a petition in the High Court claiming that the case registered against her at the Hogalberia police station in Nadia district was based on fabricated allegations. She had sought a stay on any coercive police action and the quashing of the entire case.

During the hearing, Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya directed her to appear before the investigating officer on August 14. The court stated that the next hearing would be on October 1, while the interim relief would remain in effect until October 5 or further orders.

On what grounds did the High Court grant relief?
In its order, the court noted that the sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) under which the case was registered against Moitra carry a maximum punishment of less than seven years. In such cases, if the accused cooperates with the investigation, they can be granted protection against coercive action. The court granted interim relief on this basis. It also clarified that Moitra must comply with police notices and cooperate with the interrogation by appearing before the investigating officer.

What arguments did Mahua Moitra and the state government present in court?
Moitra’s counsel, Ayan Bhattacharya, informed the court that the MP is currently in Delhi and the Monsoon Session of Parliament is ongoing until August 13. Therefore, she could join the investigation virtually if required until August 13 and would appear in person before the investigating officer starting August 14. On the other hand, Advocate General Surojit Nath Mitra opposed the petition on behalf of the state government. He informed the court that Mahua Moitra had not appeared before the investigating officer despite four notices issued earlier.