Abhishek Banerjee’s attack is not like Mamata’s attack in 1990, but can still help the battered TMC move forward. india news

Last updated:May 31, 2026, 17:31 IST

Mamata’s skull fracture vs Abhishek’s helmet attack: Could this be a turning point for TMC fighting for survival? News18 explains 3 ways it can help

Analysts say the violent attack on Abhishek Banerjee could serve as a major strategic turning point for Mamata Banerjee, giving her a crucial opportunity to revive her battered party, the Trinamool Congress (TMC), as she did in the 1990s, and consolidate opposition unity after its debacle in the recent state assembly elections.

News18 tells.

What happened in 1990?

Mamata Banerjee used the near-fatal 1990 attack on her to build an enduring “street fighter” persona, break away from the traditional Congress party establishment, and ultimately construct the anti-Left narrative that brought her to power.

On 16 August 1990, during a rally at Hazra Crossing, Kolkata, CPI(M) youth wing workers brutally attacked BanerjeeBroke his skull with a stick. She remained hospitalized for a month fighting for her life. Rather than shy away from the public eye, Banerjee strategically weaponized the incident to change her political trajectory in four ways:

1. “Bandage as a war flag” made into a weapon: Most politicians of her era would have gone into a quiet, respectable recovery, but Banerjee leaned heavily into her physical trauma. She returned to the political arena prominently wrapped in hospital bandages. This amazing imagination established him as a living martyr. It aroused immense sympathy among the public and permanently established him as a fearless, lone defender of the people against the brutal, state-sponsored communist machinery.

2. Separated itself from the “elite” Congress culture: Banerjee was a Youth Congress leader at the time of the attack. However, he had become deeply disillusioned with the lack of aggressive support from the state’s senior Congress leadership, whom he accused of colluding with the ruling Left Front. He used the attack to show a sharp contrast between himself – a grassroots, bleeding-heart activist – and the “armchair” Congress elite who preferred negotiations behind the scenes.

This alienation directly inspired his decision to break away from the Congress Party in 1998 to form the Trinamool Congress (TMC), which was clearly positioned as the true, uncompromising voice of Bengal.

3. Permanent electoral invincibility established: The assassination attempt fundamentally changed voter attitudes. Kolkata Understand its flexibility. Shortly after his recovery, he contested the 1991 Lok Sabha election and won the Kolkata South seat, cementing his path to becoming a Union minister in the PV Narasimha Rao cabinet.

4. Created a reusable political template: The 1990 attack became the blueprint for Banerjee’s entire political functioning. Over the next three decades, whenever she faced intense political resistance, she constantly returned to the story of her physical sacrifice – from the Singur and Nandigram land protests in the late 2000s to campaigning in a wheelchair after suffering a leg injury during the 2021 assembly elections.

Even decades later, she frequently raises the “Hajra 1990” incident in assembly debates and international speeches to cement her credentials as Bengal’s quintessential, steadfast survivor.

Attack on Abhishek Banerjee is not like attack on Mamata…

Political analysts and observers dismiss it Compare Drawing parallels between the mob attack on Trinamool Congress (TMC) general secretary Abhishek Banerjee in Sonarpur and the historic attack on Mamata Banerjee in 1990.

At that time, Mamata Banerjee was a rising rebel leader fighting the formidable Left Front establishment. He worked as a grassroots street fighter with limited institutional support, and built his political capital through physical resilience. Abhishek Banerjee is the established, resource-rich, de facto “Number 2” of the Trinamool Congress. He says his prominence is linked to his lineage as Mamata’s nephew rather than his decades-long independent grassroots existence.

Mamata Banerjee was battling for her life after her skull was fractured due to lathi blows in the attack at Hazra Crossing. He required 16 stitches and his heavily bandaged head became an iconic, definitive symbol of his political comeback. The Sonarpur incident included Abhishek being pushed, slapped and attacked with eggs and stones by the mob. Because he was wearing a cricket helmet, he escaped serious, life-threatening head injury.

In the 1990s, the bipolar political scenario in West Bengal between the Congress and the Left Front left a huge void for the emergence of a new, sympathetic force. Mamata took advantage of public anger over state-sponsored violence. In 2026, the attack comes after a serious electoral defeat for the TMC, which is currently facing an existential crisis and intense public anger over its governance. According to experts, opponents and analysts say the aggression in Sonarpur reflects local resentment, with “thieves” slogans raised at the convoy, making it difficult for the party to generate a net wave of political sympathy.

TMC can use the attack on Abhishek Banerjee in 3 ways

The attack in Sonarpur – where helmet-wearing Abhishek Banerjee was manhandled and pelted with stones, shoes and eggs – comes at a highly sensitive time for the party. Analysts believe this event has the potential to transform West Bengal political landscape Through three different paths:

• Following TMC’s disastrous assembly election defeat, Mamata Banerjee’s national influence within the Indian bloc was severely diminished. However, the seriousness of the attack generated immediate, unexpected solidarity from senior opposition figures. Top Congress leaders like Mallikarjun Kharge and Rahul Gandhi strongly condemned the attack and described it as “vengeance politics”. This collective anger offers a common cause that can help bring the scattered opposition around the TMC back together.
• Mamata Banerjee has a long political history of turning physical aggression against herself or her party into powerful public movements, a play that originally propelled her to power against the Left Front. Mamata immediately launched an aggressive media counter-attack, invoking the slogan “rulers turned murderers” against the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). By portraying the ambush as a premeditated assassination attempt where Abhishek “could have died on the spot”, the TMC is actively attempting to divert public sentiment away from anti-incumbency and towards public sympathy.
• The incident reflects an alarming surge in political instability across Bengal, meaning both sides are embroiled in unrelated narratives. Pointing to the deliberate removal of police security, TMC has termed it a pre-planned conspiracy; Targeted violence against opposition leaders. Meanwhile, BJP called it a spontaneous public crisis of 15 years of accumulated public anger. Ultimately, whether this changes the long-term dynamic depends entirely on whether Mamata can convert this immediate political sympathy into sustained grassroots mobilization for the remainder of the election cycle.

Top FAQs

What do you mean by “Mamata did this in 1990”?

It mentions an incident in which Mamta Banerjee He was physically attacked, but the episode helped strengthen his public image as a fighter and contributed to his political rise.

Can Abhishek Banerjee turn the attack into political gain?

Abhishek Banerjee’s supporters argue that a strong public outreach campaign could generate sympathy and strengthen her leadership credibility within the All India Trinamool Congress.

What three things can TMC do?

highlight the incident through public campaigns; Use it to organize party workers at the grassroots level; Focusing on governance and development issues, present this episode as evidence of political intimidation.

with agency input

read more