SC stays Calcutta HC verdict disqualifying Mukul Roy as MLA for defecting to TMC

The Supreme Court on Friday (January 16) stayed the Calcutta High Court verdict disqualifying senior leader Mukul Roy as an MLA of the West Bengal Assembly after he defected to the TMC from the BJP.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi stayed the November 13, 2025 order of the high court.

Also read | SC disturbed by Calcutta HC chaos, calls ED charges against Mamata ‘very serious’

Taking recourse to the anti-defection law, the high court, in an unprecedented move, exercised its constitutional authority to disqualify an elected lawmaker.

Roy was elected to the House on a BJP ticket from the Krishnanagar Uttar seat in May 2021, but joined the ruling TMC in June that year in the presence of Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and TMC national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee, while retaining his MLA status.

As per Live Law, the bench passed the interim order while issuing notice on a petition filed by Subhranshu Roy, Mukul Roy’s son, challenging the High Court’s decision. The bench directed that the operation of the High Court judgement shall remain in abeyance.

Anti-defection ruling stayed

Disqualification petitions were filed by BJP Leader of Opposition Suvendu Adhikari and party MLA Ambika Roy. After the Speaker declined to disqualify Roy, Adhikari moved the High Court. Before the Supreme Court, counsel for the petitioner argued that the High Court had exceeded its jurisdiction by ordering the disqualification of a legislator while exercising limited judicial review powers, according to Live Law report.

The counsel also informed that since Mukul Roy was unwell, his son has filed the petition. The counsel submitted that the Speaker had rejected the petitions on the ground that the social media posts submitted to show the alleged defection of Mukul Roy were not authenticated in terms of Section 65B of the Evidence Act. However, the High Court reversed this view, observing that strict adherence to Section 65B was not necessary in proceedings under the tenth schedule of the Constitution.

Also read | Calcutta HC disposes TMC's plea after ED denies any seizure during I-PAC raid

Senior Advocate Guarav Agarwal, appearing for Suvendhu Adhikari and Ambika Roy, submitted that Roy had contested on a BJP ticket and had later openly joined the rival party, which clearly amounted to defection. Agarwal also raised objection to the locus of the son filing the petition. However, the bench was not convinced much by the argument on locus. “If he is in a critical situation, why can't a family member file the petition? He is also added as a respondent,” CJI Kant said.

As per the report, Agarwal opposed the stay of the judgement, saying that he can prima facie show that there was defection. However, the bench ordered a stay of the judgement, having regard to the consequence. “The Assembly is coming to an end in four months,” CJI Kant noted. “If he contest the election again for MLA, then you move an application, we will see what is to be done,” CJI told Agarwal.

(With agency inputs)