Trinamool Congress General Secretary and Diamond Harbour Lok Sabha MP Abhishek Banerjee on Monday, 17 August approached a single-judge Bench of the Calcutta High Court, challenging the freezing of his bank account by bank authorities just days before his scheduled departure to the United States for ophthalmic treatment — a trip sanctioned by the Supreme Court of India.

The Petition and Its Core Arguments

Counsel Ayan Bhattacharya, representing Abhishek — who is the nephew of former West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee — filed the petition before Justice Krishan Rao. The petition alleged that debit restrictions were imposed on Abhishek's account without prior notice and without informing him of any reason for the freeze.

Bhattacharya further contended that the bank authorities failed to follow the mandatory procedure under Section 107 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which requires the police to first approach the concerned magistrate before seeking a freeze on an individual's bank account. The counsel argued that bypassing this step renders the action legally untenable and sought an urgent hearing in the matter.

Court's Initial Response

Justice Rao admitted the petition and queried whether any active investigation was underway against Abhishek. In response, the MP's counsel clarified that his client was cooperating with the investigation as directed by the court, and that the ongoing probe had no bearing on — and provided no legal basis for — the account freeze. The court subsequently ordered notices to be served on all concerned parties. The next hearing is scheduled for 19 August.

Supreme Court Had Cleared the Foreign Travel

The legal backdrop to this dispute is significant. Last week, a Supreme Court Division Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana overturned the Calcutta High Court's earlier refusal to ease travel restrictions on Abhishek, permitting him to travel abroad for three weeks for eye treatment.

The apex court's permission, however, came with conditions: Abhishek must travel exclusively on his diplomatic passport and is required to share his complete itinerary and place of stay with the investigating agency throughout the trip.

Why This Development Matters

The bank account freeze, coming immediately after a Supreme Court-granted travel clearance, raises procedural questions that go beyond Abhishek's individual case. Critics argue that freezing an account without following the statutory process under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita amounts to a circumvention of judicial oversight. This is not the first time Abhishek has been at the centre of a legal tussle involving travel restrictions and enforcement actions — he has been under scrutiny in connection with ongoing investigations in West Bengal.

The Calcutta High Court's ruling on 19 August is expected to clarify whether the account freeze was procedurally valid and whether it will be stayed pending the hearing.