The Calcutta High Court on Thursday refused to unfreeze three accounts linked to the Trinamool Congress (TMC) party, offering no immediate relief to the Kalighat facton led by its chief and former West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee.
Justice Sougata Bhattacharya, while hearing the case, sought an affidavit from the concerned bank authorities and directed the banks to submit their responses by next Tuesday. The judge also asked the police to file a report detailing the progress of the investigation.
The controversy comes amid internal rift within the TMC following the party’s recent poll debacle in the assembly elections, and a split within its parliamentary and legislative wings.
Former party treasurer Aroop Biswas had earlier sought freezing of the party’s accounts, citing internal disputes. In his communication with the bank authorities, he reportedly identified himself as the party treasurer.
On June 18, a legislator from South 24 Parganas lodged a complaint at Bidhannagar Cyber Police Station alleging that funds linked to a major cyber fraud may have entered certain bank accounts, including some belonging to the TMC.
Based on the complaint, police registered an FIR and later directed banks to freeze debit transactions in three accounts.
Challenging police action, the Kalighat faction approached the High Court, arguing that the accounts are used to pay staff salaries, office expenses, electricity bills and political programme-related costs.
The faction argued before the court that the accounts had been frozen merely on the basis of suspicion and without any concrete evidence.
While the petition initially referred to three accounts, the Kalighat camp claimed during Thursday’s hearing that a total of eight accounts had now been frozen. Senior advocate Kishore Dutta, appearing for the Kalighat camp, questioned the basis of the police action.
“The complaint does not specify how much money entered the accounts, where it came from, or who transferred it. Even the complainant admitted not knowing the source of the money,” Dutta argued before the court.
He further contended that if suspicion existed over a specific amount, authorities could have frozen only that portion rather than blocking the entire accounts.
The Kalighat camp also alleged political motives behind the move, claiming opposition leaders and workers had been facing a series of cases after the elections.
It sought quashing of the FIR and removal of the freeze order, while also requesting interim relief from the court.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, also representing the Kalighat faction, questioned whether police could take such action against a political party.
“The police are taking this step to cripple a political party,” Singhvi argued.
“If Trinamool has split into two factions, that issue has to be decided by the Election Commission or the court. How could the police assume a split and freeze accounts before that determination?” he argued.
Counsel for the complainant, Neeraj Kishan Kaul, however, questioned the maintainability of the petition itself.
“If there is a division within the party, the Election Commission will decide it. But the other side itself appears to be acknowledging that the party has split. Before ownership of the funds is decided, how can one faction claim exclusive rights over them?” Kaul argued.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was also present during the hearing, said, “One side says I am the president, the other side says I am the president. In such a situation, the court should pass an order that is practically implementable.”
The court has now sought the stand of the bank authorities and directed police to provide an investigation status report. The matter is likely to come up for hearing again on Wednesday.