The Supreme Court on Friday (October 16, 2026) asked the West Bengal government to provide Mamata All India Trinamool Congress (MAITC) MP Mahua Moitra accommodation at the government circuit house in Krishnanagar, her Lok Sabha constituency, on a day’s notice, instead of requiring three to four days’ advance intimation stipulated by the district administration.
The court suggested putting in place a protocol governing visits by MPs to their constituencies, particularly in view of the upcoming festive season. Ms. Moitra had approached the top court seeking guidelines to ensure cooperation from local authorities and the police during visits to her constituency and while undertaking development work under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS). Her petition cited a series of incidents which, she alleged, had impeded her ability to discharge her duties as an elected representative. The petition alleged that her requests for police assistance went unanswered. When Mr. Mehta urged the Bench to make availability a precondition for providing accommodation, the court pointed out that circuit houses were meant for official purposes and that accommodation requests could be prioritised accordingly. Mr. The Bench declined to examine the grievance over the stalled projects and asked Ms. Moitra to make a representation to the district administration. It granted her liberty to approach the High Court if the authorities failed to respond.
The Bench also flagged that disputes of this nature ought not to require the top court’s intervention through a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, which provides a remedy for the enforcement of fundamental rights. Among them was an incident on the night of August 14, when she was allegedly asked to vacate the Nadia Circuit House even as a large crowd gathered outside the premises, abusing and threatening her. Mehta objected to the submission, arguing that such disputes were not matters an MP could seek to resolve through an Article 32 petition before the Supreme Court.
“Your political problems can’t be solved in an Article 32 petition before this court,” he said.
