The controversy over Mamata Banerjee’s leg injury during the 2021 Nandigram election campaign has resurfaced after Shubhendu Adhikari claimed that there was no evidence of a fracture or dislocation in her leg at the time. Following the claim, Mamata Banerjee’s lawyer issued a legal notice to SSKM Hospital and concerned health officials over the alleged disclosure of her medical records.
The dispute is no longer limited to the nature of the injury sustained in 2021. Questions have also been raised over how the former chief minister’s private medical documents reached government officials and how they were made public without her permission. The issue has triggered renewed debate in West Bengal over electoral politics, medical confidentiality and the use of government records.
On October 3, Shubhendu Adhikari claimed that he had a medical report relating to Mamata Banerjee’s 2021 injury. According to him, a radiology report dated March 11, 2021, recorded no evidence of a fracture or dislocation in her leg. Adhikari alleged on this basis that the injury was exaggerated during the Assembly election campaign.
Adhikari also said that the state government would conduct a fresh investigation into the matter. However, the absence of a fracture in a particular medical examination does not, by itself, conclusively establish that a person had no other injury. Doctors’ examinations, other medical reports and treatment records may also be relevant to determining the full nature of an injury.
The political claims and medical findings therefore remain separate aspects of the dispute.
Mamata Banerjee’s lawyer, Arka Nag, has sent a legal notice to officials associated with SSKM Hospital, Bangur Institute of Neurosciences and the state health department. The notice reportedly seeks an explanation of how Mamata Banerjee’s 2021 medical records reached Shubhendu Adhikari and were subsequently made public.
The notice also raises the question of whether, if the documents were lawfully obtained by a government department or investigating agency, there was permission to make them public. It also seeks to establish whether any court order existed authorising the disclosure of the records.
The issue raised on Mamata Banerjee’s behalf centres on who was responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of the patient’s medical information.
Another key question is whether the document Adhikari claims to possess was the original medical record or a copy. Mamata Banerjee’s lawyer has reportedly sought clarification on this aspect as well.
Medical records contain personal and sensitive health information. Their disclosure can therefore raise issues beyond the political dispute, including patient privacy and the responsibilities of medical professionals.
A clearer picture of how the documents emerged will depend on a detailed official response from the hospital and health department to the legal notice.
The dispute relates to an incident on March 10, 2021, when Mamata Banerjee was campaigning in Nandigram for the Assembly election. At the time, she was both chief minister and the Trinamool Congress candidate.
Mamata Banerjee alleged that she was pushed by people in the crowd during the campaign and subsequently struck her leg against the open door of her car, injuring her left leg. She was admitted to SSKM Hospital in Kolkata following the incident.
The injury became a major political issue during the West Bengal election campaign. Mamata Banerjee was subsequently seen campaigning with her leg in a plaster and using a wheelchair. Shubhendu Adhikari was the BJP candidate from Nandigram in that election and defeated Mamata Banerjee. The issue has therefore remained particularly sensitive in the political confrontation between the two leaders.
After Mamata Banerjee was admitted to SSKM Hospital in 2021, doctors reported injuries to her left leg and ankle, along with injuries and pain in other parts of her body. She was later discharged from the hospital with her leg in a plaster.
The report cited by Shubhendu Adhikari in the latest dispute reportedly states that a particular radiology examination found no fracture or dislocation. The document needs to be considered in the context of the complete medical record and other tests conducted at the time.
A final conclusion about the full nature of the injury therefore cannot be drawn solely from one report without considering the broader medical record.
Mamata Banerjee campaigned in a wheelchair during the 2021 Assembly election despite her injury. The incident affected the election campaign at both the political and public levels.
The Trinamool Congress ultimately secured a majority in the state and Mamata Banerjee began her third term as chief minister. She, however, lost the Nandigram seat to Shubhendu Adhikari.
Five years later, the disclosure of documents related to the injury and the political allegations surrounding them have brought the old electoral dispute back into focus.
The Trinamool Congress has rejected Shubhendu Adhikari’s claims. The party described the move as politically motivated and alleged that the issue was being raised for political gain amid the by-election environment.
Adhikari, on the other hand, has maintained that the documents in his possession support his allegations and said that the state government would investigate the matter. He has also indicated that more documents related to the case could emerge.
The dispute has therefore developed around two separate questions: whether the public claims concerning Mamata Banerjee’s 2021 injury correspond with the medical records, and, if the relevant records are authentic, how they entered the public domain.
Separate from the political allegations, medical confidentiality is a central issue in the case. A patient’s health records contain private and sensitive information. It will therefore be necessary to establish who obtained the documents, under what authority they were obtained and who authorised their disclosure.
Mamata Banerjee’s legal notice has placed these questions at the centre of the dispute. The hospital and health department will now have to explain what procedures were followed to protect the records and in relation to their alleged disclosure.
The next developments in the case will depend primarily on the authenticity and full context of the relevant medical records and the circumstances under which the documents became public.
If the government or an investigating agency conducts a fresh inquiry into the 2021 incident, its findings will be relevant to the competing political claims. Similarly, an explanation from the hospital or health department on how the medical records were disclosed could clarify the dispute over medical confidentiality.
At present, it would be premature to conclude that Mamata Banerjee’s injury was entirely fabricated or that it occurred in the manner alleged. Publicly available reports record Shubhendu Adhikari’s allegations and the objection raised by Mamata Banerjee’s side, but a final conclusion would require a competent investigation or a comprehensive review of authenticated medical records.
