Rahul Gandhi, Congress leader, addressed a massive crowd at a high-energy rally near Shahid Minar in Kolkata today. The event buzzed with enthusiasm as thousands of supporters gathered under the scorching sun, many spilling outside the hangar venue.

Gandhi arrived nearly an hour late from a meeting in Sreerampore, but the delay did little to dampen spirits. Heavy NSG security blanketed the area, underscoring the event's intensity. The backdrop featured a giant image of Gandhi holding the Constitution's preamble, flanked by Sonia Gandhi, Mallikarjun Kharge, Priyanka Gandhi, and Bengal Congress president Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury.

Huge placards displayed the Congress manifesto, with digital boards highlighting key promises. Reporters and cameramen swarmed the venue, capturing every moment opposite the historic Shahid Minar—a reminder of Congress's rule in Bengal five decades ago. Gandhi wasted no time launching sharp attacks.

"While Congress fights to unite India's people, BJP divides them on religion, creed, and caste," he declared. He spoke of personal hardships, saying he stood before them on bail after losing his official home and Lok Sabha membership. "Modi has hit me with investigation after investigation," Gandhi added.

He contrasted this with West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, accusing agencies of sparing her despite "scams."

"If probes against Mamataji were real, she'd be on bail too," he quipped, alleging BJP's "original fight" targets only Congress. Gandhi branded Prime Minister Narendra Modi a "specialised vote chor" for alleged manipulations in Maharashtra, Bihar, and Karnataka. He mocked Modi's "56-inch chest" and "desh bhakti" claims, questioning why he fled Parliament during Gandhi's speech against "Adani and Ambani."

On farmers, Gandhi warned Modi had agreed to sell American products in India, "deciding to kill our farmers." He accused the government of data transfers and petroleum imports needing U.S. permission. Praising true patriots like Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, Mahatma Gandhi, and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, he slammed Bengal's issues: cheat funds, coal smuggling, and job scams.

Gandhi ridiculed unfulfilled job promises—Mamata's 5 lakh jobs and Modi's 2 crore annually—likening them to empty jokes. He drew parallels between rapists going free in BJP states and similar failures under TMC, saying both parties neglect jobs.

"Mamata ji has opened the door for BJP in Bengal," he charged. Congress, Gandhi stressed, refuses compromise with BJP. "We are the only ones who can defeat them," he asserted. He claimed both Trinamool Congress and BJP conspired to block his Bengal visits, cancelling rallies and denying cooperation.

Repeating his call against scams, he urged unity: "In a world of hate, we must bloom flowers of love. Don't fear—Congress will win one day. "Other speakers amplified the rhetoric. Amba Prasad recited poetry attacking TMC's "syndicate raj, jungle raj, and corruption." Without naming Banerjee, she targeted a "woman in white saree and slippers," saying welfare schemes had turned people into servants.

"You won't get jobs, just bhatas," she said. "Girls' families now ask how much you earn from schemes. Mamata Banerjee should go now. Beware TMC and BJP. Bengalis resisted British rule but now bow to handouts."Rohan Mitra, Ballygunge candidate and son of late leader Somen Mitra, hit RSS hard.

"TMC and BJP share one father: RSS," he declared. He criticised TMC for failing to re-enroll voters post-Special Intensive Revision (SIR). Congress, he boasted, has a clear opposition and CM face in Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, while BJP lacks faces in Bengal. The rally pulsed with energy.

Supporters chanted slogans, waved flags, and endured the heat for a glimpse of Gandhi. Congress positioned itself as Bengal's anti-BJP bulwark, promising jobs, unity, and a return to its storied legacy. As the crowd dispersed, the message lingered: Congress eyes maximum seats to challenge BJP's dominance.

This event signals escalating pre-election battles in West Bengal, where Congress is looking at a revival amid TMC-BJP rivalry. Analysts note Gandhi's personal narrative and local attacks could energise cadres, though seat-sharing dynamics remain fluid.

The Trinamool Congress (TMC) has increasingly relied on Lok Sabha MPs Saayoni Ghosh and Dev as two of its most visible campaigners in West Bengal, reflecting a broader strategy that combines public recognition with political messaging.

In a state where electoral outcomes are shaped not just by organisation but also by personality and emotional resonance, both leaders have moved beyond celebrity status to occupy distinct political roles. Saayoni is often positioned as a sharp and energetic youth voice, while Dev — also a hugely popular actor — functions as a widely recognised and accessible crowd-puller.

Saayoni Ghosh’s entry into politics has been relatively recent but structured. Before joining active politics, she built a career in films and television, becoming familiar to audiences in Bengal. Coming from a middle-class Kolkata background, she developed a public image that the party later saw as politically useful.

According to TMC spokesperson Kunal Ghosh, “That public image helped TMC see her as more than an actress. The party understood that she could speak to young people, defend the party in public, and answer opponents with confidence. Her appointment as president of the state youth wing in 2021 showed that the party wanted her to do real political work, not just appear on stage. Later, her win from Jadavpur in the 2024 Lok Sabha election confirmed that she had moved from celebrity politics to serious political responsibility.”

Dev’s trajectory into politics followed a different path. Already a well-known Bengali film star, he entered public life with significant name recognition. He grew up between Chandrakona in Paschim Medinipur and Mumbai, studied computer engineering, and later built a successful film career.

Kunal Ghosh said, “His family background gave him a story that ordinary people could relate to, and his film career made him instantly familiar to voters. When he later entered politics, he did not need to introduce himself. People already knew his face, his voice, and his screen image. That familiarity became a major political advantage. In 2023, Mamata Banerjee’s decision to appoint him as brand ambassador for Bengal tourism underlined how strongly the party values him as a public figure.”

A senior IPAC functionary, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the party’s use of both leaders is part of a deliberate campaign strategy. “Saayoni brings urgency, youth appeal, and a fighting spirit. Dev brings warmth, popularity, and a softer image that cuts across age groups. Together, they help the party speak to different kinds of voters. Saayoni can attract students, first-time voters, and people who want a tough political voice. Dev can reach families, film fans, and voters who prefer a familiar and less aggressive style,” he said.

The same strategist explained that Saayoni’s effectiveness lies in her direct style of communication. She is often deployed in areas where the party seeks sharper messaging against opponents and a stronger emotional connection with voters. Her speeches tend to be personal and immediate, presenting her as a confident and combative figure — a style that resonates particularly with younger voters.

Dev, by contrast, is used differently. He is not typically positioned as a combative speaker but as a figure who draws crowds. His presence alone can attract large audiences, after which the party delivers its message. “This is one of the oldest and most useful forms of political campaigning, and Dev fits it well. He can turn a public meeting into a social event. He can create interest even before he speaks. That makes him especially valuable in both urban and semi-urban areas, where star value still matters a great deal,” the strategist said.

Both leaders also benefit from being rooted in Bengal’s cultural landscape. Their association with the state’s entertainment industry gives them familiarity and relatability among voters. This, in turn, allows the party to project itself as aligned with Bengal’s cultural sensibilities while maintaining a contemporary image.

Within the party, both have received visible backing. Chief minister Mamata Banerjee’s decision to assign Dev a role in promoting Bengal tourism highlighted the leadership’s confidence in him beyond electoral campaigning. Saayoni, meanwhile, has been recognised within the party for her assertiveness and clarity in political messaging.

Senior TMC MP Kalyan Banerjee summed up their complementary roles: “Saayoni gives the party edge. Dev gives it reach. Saayoni can turn a political meeting into a charged public moment. Dev can turn a rally into a mass gathering. Saayoni speaks well to the restless and the young. Dev speaks well to the broad middle that likes familiarity and calm confidence. In Bengal’s highly competitive political space, that mix is powerful.”

Their prominence also reflects a broader shift in campaign dynamics, where recognisable faces and trusted voices often carry more immediate impact than traditional messaging alone. As a result, Saayoni Ghosh and Dev continue to function not just as public figures but as key political assets within the TMC’s campaign strategy in West Bengal.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday sharpened his attack on West Bengal’s ruling Trinamool Congress at an election rally in Baruipur, accusing the state government of allowing “anarchy” to take hold at Jadavpur University — one of India’s most prominent higher education institutions.

Chief minister Mamata Banerjee responded with an open letter and social media posts, calling his remarks an insult to Bengal’s youth and turning the charge of anarchy back on the Centre.

Addressing the rally ahead of phase two of the ongoing state Assembly elections, Modi invoked the university’s legacy while alleging a decline in its present condition. “The name of Jadavpur University was once spoken of with reverence across the globe,” he said. “Its foundation rested on nationalism. But today, threats echo within its premises. Anti-national slogans are scrawled on walls. Instead of studies, students hit the streets. We want learning, not chaos; empathy, not intimidation.”

He questioned how a state government that, in his view, was failing to safeguard a premier institution could secure Bengal’s future. The prime minister also referred to what the right-wing ecosystem is fond of calling the “tukde-tukde gang” — a nebulous catch-all used for alleged anti-national elements who wish to break the country into pieces (tukde) — and criticised what he described as disruptions to academic activity on campus.

Banerjee responded swiftly and sharply. In a public letter, she wrote: “Honourable Prime Minister, it pains me deeply to ask: Is this how you describe the brilliant students of renowned Jadavpur University? Year after year, it tops your own government’s NIRF rankings — a true seat of excellence. Yet you disparage it? Can you stoop so low?” She praised the university’s students for their “sharp minds and questioning spirit”, describing these as the essence of education rather than signs of disorder.

Escalating her attack, Banerjee listed what she described as real instances of anarchy. “Anarchy is bulldozers as tools of power, not justice,” she said. “It’s farmers dying while their voices are silenced. It’s freeing rapists for political gain. It’s denying the poor their rights, dividing the nation on religious lines for votes, dodging the media, and ignoring Manipur’s flames while chasing elections.”

She defended student protests as integral to democracy and urged Modi not to “tarnish” an institution shaped by nationalist thinkers such as Sri Aurobindo. “Please don’t insult Bengal,” she added.

The exchange has stirred sharp reactions in Kolkata’s political and academic circles, particularly around Jadavpur University, long associated with left-leaning student activism. Students were quick to respond. Vaishnavi Sarkar of the Democratic Students’ Front said, “No right-wing student group has ever dominated Jadavpur. The prime minister’s frustration stems from that failure.” Noel Gomes of We the Independent (WTI), a campus organisation, added, “Our students walk tall and fearless. That’s what intimidates him.”

The campus has frequently been at the centre of political debate, with protests over issues ranging from fees to national policies drawing both praise and criticism. The TMC has characterised such activism as democratic dissent, while BJP leaders have often described it as evidence of ideological extremism.

Political analyst Sujit Chatterjee said, “Modi’s Baruipur speech fits a broader BJP narrative painting TMC as soft on ‘anti-nationals’ to rally Hindu voters in south Bengal. However, this may not work. We already saw students all over India speaking against Modi and his government after what happened at universities in Delhi and elsewhere.”

With elections approaching, both sides appear to be intensifying their messaging. Modi has repeatedly targeted the TMC government on education, employment and law and order, while Banerjee has countered by highlighting Centre-state tensions, including disputes over funding and issues such as violence in Manipur. Her letter has been widely shared online, amplifying the political divide.

Analysts say the episode reflects a familiar electoral pattern. One observer noted that Modi’s remarks appear aimed at tapping urban youth sentiment, while Banerjee’s response seeks to frame the issue as one of regional pride and identity. For now, Jadavpur University has once again become a focal point in West Bengal’s high-stakes political contest.

With the first phase of polling set for 23 April and the second on 29 April, West Bengal enters a high-stakes electoral contest defined less by rhetoric and more by lived experience. Across villages, towns and Kolkata’s neighbourhoods, the choice before voters is stark: a decade of welfare delivery under Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress (TMC), or the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) promise of larger payouts and structural change.

TMC leaders have sharpened their attack by citing what they call a pattern of delivery gaps in BJP-ruled states. In Madhya Pradesh, for instance, the much-publicised Ladli Behna scheme has seen periodic complaints over delays and exclusions even as beneficiary numbers expanded.

In Uttar Pradesh, Opposition parties have repeatedly flagged irregularities in pension disbursals and gaps in job creation despite headline claims around employment drives. And in Assam, schemes such as Orunodoi — while significant — have been criticised for limited coverage relative to demand and shifting eligibility criteria.

At the national level, the BJP continues to face political pushback over unfulfilled or diluted promises. The oft-cited assurance of bringing back black money and depositing Rs 15 lakh in every citizen’s account — raised during the 2014 Indian general election campaign — remains a recurring reference point for sceptical voters. Similarly, ambitious employment targets have not kept pace with demand, with joblessness continuing to feature prominently in voter concerns across states.

BJP leaders contest these criticisms, pointing to large-scale central schemes, infrastructure expansion and direct benefit transfers as evidence of governance capacity. But in Bengal’s campaign, the TMC's argument is landing with a section of voters: that scale of promise does not always translate into consistency of delivery.

At tea stalls and market crossings, the conversation is grounded in immediacy — food, healthcare, housing and cash support. TMC’s pitch rests on continuity and proof: schemes that have reached households consistently over the years. BJP, in contrast, is offering scale — higher cash transfers, job guarantees and a broader economic reset — without having governed the state to demonstrate delivery.

Pre-poll estimates suggest a TMC advantage, with projections placing it between 184 and 194 seats, against BJP’s 98 to 108.

TMC’s strength lies in its expansive welfare architecture. Over 100 schemes are delivered through Duare Sarkar camps, designed to take services directly to citizens. Lakshmir Bhandar remains its flagship: Rs 1,500 per month for general category women and Rs 1,700 for SC, ST and OBC women, following a recent increase. More than 2.42 crore women — over 60 per cent of adult females in the state — are beneficiaries.

Healthcare coverage under Swasthya Sathi extends up to Rs 5 lakh per family annually, covering crores of residents and approving lakhs of hospitalisations. Housing under Banglar Awas Yojana, farm assistance, and education support through Kanyashree further reinforce TMC’s welfare base. For many households, these are not abstract policies but regular financial lifelines.

Newer additions such as Yuvashree, offering Rs 1,500 monthly to the unemployed aged 21-40, aim to address job distress, though on a limited scale compared to demand. Banerjee’s campaign messaging has leaned into continuity — steady expansion of benefits, more funds for agriculture, and extended health outreach.

The BJP’s counter is aggressive and targeted. Its proposed 'Annapurna Bhandar' promises Rs 3,000 per month for women — double the TMC’s baseline — alongside free transport, expanded healthcare and a broader welfare package. It has also promised one job per family, support for startups, implementation of the Seventh Pay Commission for government employees, and sector-specific pushes such as jute revival and dairy expansion.

The BJP is also foregrounding issues of unemployment, law and order, and corruption — areas where voter concern remains significant. Yet its challenge is credibility: these promises remain prospective in a state it has not governed.

On the ground, this gap is evident. Rural voters, especially women, appear more inclined towards the certainty of existing benefits. Urban voters and younger demographics show some openness to the BJP’s employment-focused messaging, but often with scepticism about delivery timelines.

The campaign has also seen familiar political exchanges. BJP leaders have criticised the TMC’s welfare model as fostering dependency, while Banerjee has framed her government’s approach as responsive governance rooted in daily needs.

As polling begins, the electoral question narrows to a simple test: whether voters prioritise proven, incremental support or opt for larger, untested promises. Early indicators suggest that TMC’s embedded welfare network continues to provide it with a decisive edge — particularly in rural Bengal, where elections are often won.

The verdict, however, will unfold over the two polling days — 23 and 29 April — when that quiet calculation inside households turns into votes.

With just a day to go before polling begins across 152 constituencies in the first phase of the West Bengal Assembly elections, a deepening controversy over the electoral rolls has thrown up a stark and uncomfortable contrast: while lakhs of voters remain excluded, only 136 names have been restored following appellate tribunal scrutiny.

The supplementary list, released by the Election Commission of India in the early hours of Wednesday in compliance with a Supreme Court directive, shows that just 136 individuals cleared by tribunals will be eligible to vote on 23 April. Two names were deleted. Against the backdrop of claims that as many as 27 lakh voters have been left out, the number has triggered outrage and sharpened concerns over disenfranchisement.

The disparity is difficult to ignore. After months of scrutiny, legal recourse and assurances of due process, the restoration of just over a hundred names — many of them not ordinary voters — raises questions about whether the system has functioned in any meaningful sense for those excluded.

An official linked to the tribunals indicated that nearly 95 per cent of those cleared are government staff and booth-level officers assigned election duty. Many among them had found themselves in an administrative bind: their names struck off the rolls, yet required to conduct polling. Their cases, the official said, were prioritised to ensure the smooth conduct of elections.

That explanation, while pragmatic, underscores the core criticism — that the process appears to have favoured institutional necessity over the rights of ordinary voters. For the vast majority who approached tribunals, there is still no resolution, even as polling begins.

The controversy traces back to 28 February, when the Commission published the final electoral rolls with around 60 lakh names flagged for scrutiny. Voters whose names were excluded approached appellate tribunals, which had indicated that no deletions would occur without hearing those affected. Yet the newly released list includes two deletions and offers little clarity on how many cases were processed overall, beyond the 136 approvals.

Invoking its powers under Article 142, the Supreme Court had ruled that those cleared by tribunals by 21 April could vote in the first phase, while those cleared by 27 April would be eligible for the second phase on 29 April. The Commission subsequently issued separate 'addition' and 'deletion' lists, accessible online through EPIC numbers or booth details. Booths with no changes were marked accordingly.

But the timing — close to midnight on the eve of polling — has only deepened unease. Critics say the opaque release mirrors earlier instances of last-minute updates, making meaningful verification difficult for affected voters.

The political response has been sharp. The state's ruling Trinamool Congress leaders have termed the exercise an effective denial of voting rights on a mass scale. The party's state vice-president Jayprakash Majumdar said resolving just 136 cases in weeks was “like sprinkling drops on a hot pan”, and questioned what fault lay with the lakhs still excluded.

The BJP, however, has defended the process. Rajya Sabha MP Rahul Sinha said names were removed due to lack of documentation and that only those who could substantiate their claims were being reinstated. He argued that tribunals were examining cases thoroughly rather than allowing indiscriminate inclusion.

The dispute has already reached Calcutta High Court, where multiple petitions challenge what has been described as a “mass cancellation” of voter names. Advocate Jhuma Sen has sought urgent intervention, questioning what happens to those left out just hours before polling. Another petitioner, Sheikh Anwar Ali, has alleged that the tribunal process itself lacks transparency, citing the absence of clear procedures for appeals, notices or legal representation.

Legal observers suggest the court may seek explanations on how the lists were prepared and whether due process was followed. Authorities are likely to argue that the revision complies with existing rules. Yet the scale of exclusion — and the minuscule number of restorations — keeps the issue alive.

At its heart, the controversy is not merely administrative but democratic. When such a large number of citizens are left uncertain about their right to vote until the eve of polling — and most still without recourse — the integrity of the process itself comes under strain.

As polling begins, only those 136 cleared by 21 April can be certain of their participation. For the rest, the promise of redress remains distant, and the question lingers: how many voices have been left unheard before the first vote is even cast?

The first phase of West Bengal’s assembly elections on 23 April has turned into a high-stakes contest shaped by intense campaigning, welfare promises, identity politics, and a heavy security deployment. The battle is not just for seats but for competing narratives — whether voters back Mamata Banerjee’s welfare model or opt for a BJP-led “change” centred on governance overhaul, Uniform Civil Code (UCC), anti-infiltration measures, and job creation.

Campaigning for Phase I ended on 21 April, leaving behind a politically charged atmosphere. According to Election Commission of India data, 152 constituencies will vote in this phase, covering parts of north Bengal and several southern districts, with nearly 3.6 crore eligible voters. The contest has been sharpened by debates around food habits, cross-border infiltration, the UCC, and electoral rolls, making it more than a routine opening round.

Both camps have framed the election as a decisive choice about Bengal’s future. BJP leaders, including Narendra Modi and Amit Shah, targeted the ruling party over corruption, political violence, and infiltration. The Trinamool Congress (TMC), in turn, defended its welfare record and accused the BJP of fearmongering and manipulating voter lists.

The BJP’s campaign has focused on governance change, border security, and expanded welfare promises. Amit Shah said Banerjee’s “time at the helm has come to an end” and asserted that central forces have been deployed “at every nook and corner” to ensure free voting. The party has promised Rs 3,000 monthly aid for women, implementation of the UCC within six months, pending dearness allowance (DA) for state employees, 7th Pay Commission benefits, rollout of Ayushman Bharat, and a probe into political violence.

The TMC has countered by questioning the BJP’s credibility. Abhishek Banerjee accused the party of a history of “false promises”, citing unfulfilled pledges such as Rs 15 lakh in bank accounts and two crore jobs annually. Mamata Banerjee asserted that the TMC would return to power and also took aim at Modi’s claim of being the BJP’s candidate across all seats, saying he would have to resign as prime minister for that to happen.

Attention is sharply focused on Nandigram, where Suvendu Adhikari faces TMC’s Prabitra Kar. The seat remains symbolically significant after the high-profile Banerjee-Adhikari contest in the previous election, making it a key indicator of early momentum.

Other closely watched constituencies include Siliguri, Darjeeling, Cooch Behar, Jalpaiguri, Raiganj, Islampur, Balurghat, English Bazar, Jangipur, and Mekhliganj — regions shaped by a mix of border concerns, tea garden issues, identity politics, and welfare expectations. Baharampur is notable as Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury returns to Assembly politics after over two decades.

Kharagpur Sadar is another key battleground, with Dilip Ghosh in the fray, making it a prestige contest for the BJP. In Murshidabad, controversy around suspended TMC MLA Humayun Kabir has highlighted how local issues and symbolism continue to shape campaign narratives.

The silence period began at 6 pm on 21 April, during which campaigning is prohibited. Authorities remain on high alert to prevent violations, while voters are expected to make their choices without external influence. The Election Commission has directed strict enforcement of prohibitory orders near polling stations.

Security arrangements are extensive. Around 2,450 companies of central forces — nearly 2.5 lakh personnel — have been deployed, and over 8,000 polling stations have been identified as highly sensitive. A two-step voter verification system has been introduced, with CAPF personnel checking identity documents at entry points and booth-level officers (BLOs) verifying voter details. Prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS are in force within a 100-metre radius of polling stations.

This phase blends symbolism, geography, and core political messaging. The BJP is seeking to turn the election into a referendum on corruption, infiltration, and change, while the TMC is relying on its welfare delivery and grassroots network. Voter sentiment will also hinge on everyday concerns such as wages, employment, and infrastructure, particularly in north Bengal and border districts.

Ultimately, Phase I is not just about early leads but about which narrative resonates more. A strong BJP showing could build momentum around anti-incumbency, while a resilient TMC performance would reinforce its claim that welfare politics continues to hold sway in the state.