Calcutta High Court Refuses Urgent Hearing On TMC Plea Against Freeze Of ₹440 Crore Bank Accounts

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday refused to grant an urgent hearing to a petition filed by the Trinamool Congress (TMC) challenging the freezing of three of its bank accounts, dealing a setback to the Mamata Banerjee-led party in its bid for immediate judicial intervention.

The matter came up before Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya, who declined the party's request for priority listing and observed that the petition would be taken up according to its position in the regular cause list. As a result, the TMC failed to secure immediate relief against the restrictions imposed on its accounts.

Appearing for the party, Senior Advocate Kishore Dutta informed the court that three bank accounts belonging to the Trinamool Congress had been placed under a debit freeze, effectively preventing any outward transactions from those accounts. He urged the court to take up the matter urgently, citing the impact of the freeze on the functioning of the political party.

However, the court was not inclined to accord precedence to the petition. Refusing the request for urgent hearing, Justice Bhattacharyya indicated that the case would be heard in accordance with its listing serial.

The controversy centres around three bank accounts of the Trinamool Congress that reportedly hold around ₹440 crore. Authorities imposed a debit freeze on the accounts following complaints lodged by a group of MLAs aligned with rebel leader Ritabrata Banerjee.

The complaints were submitted before the cyber crime police station functioning under the Bidhannagar Police Commissionerate. The legislators sought registration of a First Information Report and requested a detailed investigation into the source of funds deposited in the accounts as well as the nature of transactions carried out through them.

According to the complaints, the MLAs raised questions about whether the money deposited in the accounts originated from lawful sources. They urged investigating authorities to scrutinise the transactions and determine if any illegal activity was involved.

The complainants specifically sought an inquiry into allegations that the funds could be linked to unlawful practices, including suspected cut-money collections, diversion of public funds and proceeds derived from various scams. The allegations have added a significant political dimension to the dispute, as they come from legislators associated with a faction opposed to the current leadership of the party.

The debit freeze does not amount to confiscation of funds but restricts the account holder's ability to withdraw or transfer money pending inquiry. Such measures are generally adopted during investigations where authorities seek to preserve the status quo while examining financial transactions and the origin of funds.

For the Trinamool Congress, the freezing of accounts containing such a substantial amount is likely to have operational implications.