Calcutta HC rejects Abhishek Banerjee's plea against voice sample collection
Synopsis
Calcutta High Court refused to shield Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee from submitting voice samples to the CID — samples sought in a case where he is accused of threatening Home Minister Amit Shah at a campaign rally. The presiding judge then recused himself, sending the matter to the Acting Chief Justice to assign a fresh bench.
Key Takeaways
Calcutta High Court on 30 June rejected Abhishek Banerjee's plea seeking exemption from CID voice sample collection.
The case stems from alleged violence-inciting statements and threats against Union Home Minister Amit Shah at a campaign rally.
Voice sample collection was ordered by a district court in North 24 Parganas .
Justice Trithankar Ghosh ruled courts cannot dictate the CID's line of investigation, then recused himself from further hearings.
The matter has been referred to Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty to assign a new bench.
An earlier bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharya had granted Abhishek interim protection from arrest but directed him to cooperate with the probe.
The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday, 30 June declined to entertain a plea filed by Trinamool Congress general secretary and Lok Sabha member Abhishek Banerjee, who sought exemption from submitting voice samples to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID). The CID is collecting the samples in connection with a case in which Banerjee is accused of making violence-inciting statements and threatening Union Home Minister Amit Shah at a campaign rally.
Background to the Case
The CID initiated the voice sample collection following an order from a district court in North 24 Parganas. Abhishek Banerjee, the nephew of former West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, was scheduled to appear before the same court on Tuesday to submit his voice samples, which were to be recorded in the presence of the judicial magistrate and forensic experts.
What Justice Ghosh Ruled
The matter came up before a single-judge bench of Justice Trithankar Ghosh, who refused to entertain the plea. Justice Ghosh observed that since Abhishek had already been granted interim protection from coercive police action — including arrest — by another single-judge bench of the same court, there was no basis for fresh protection specifically against submitting voice samples.
Justice Ghosh further noted that courts cannot direct investigating agencies on which line of inquiry to pursue. He stated that it was entirely within the CID's remit to determine what investigative steps were necessary. Following his ruling, Justice Ghosh announced his recusal from any further hearing in the matter.
Abhishek's Counsel's Argument
During the hearing, Abhishek's counsel contended that collecting voice samples was unnecessary because his client had already acknowledged making the statements at the campaign rally ahead of the assembly polls. Justice Ghosh, however, held that such admissions did not constrain the investigating agency's choice of methods.
Earlier Court Directions
A separate single-judge bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharya had previously granted Abhishek Banerjee interim protection against arrest. That bench had simultaneously directed him to fully cooperate with the CID's investigation, and had instructed the agency to notify the court if he failed to do so.
What Happens Next
With Justice Ghosh having recused himself, the matter has been referred to Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty, who will determine which new bench will take up the case. The referral leaves the question of Abhishek's compliance with the voice sample order unresolved for now, and the CID's investigation is expected to proceed in the interim.
Point of View
Which introduces procedural delay and hands Banerjee's legal team another window to manoeuvre before a fresh bench. How the new bench reads the interplay between the existing arrest protection and the cooperation directive will set the tone for the investigation going forward.
NationPress
30 Jun 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Calcutta High Court refuse Abhishek Banerjee's plea?
The court refused because Abhishek Banerjee already had interim protection from arrest granted by another bench, and Justice Trithankar Ghosh held that this made fresh protection against voice sampling unnecessary. The judge also ruled that courts cannot direct an investigating agency on which methods to use.
What is the case against Abhishek Banerjee?
Abhishek Banerjee, the Trinamool Congress general secretary and Lok Sabha MP, is accused of making violence-inciting statements and threatening Union Home Minister Amit Shah at a campaign rally held before assembly polls. The CID is investigating the matter following a district court order.
What did Justice Trithankar Ghosh decide after refusing the plea?
After refusing the plea, Justice Ghosh announced his recusal from further hearings in the matter. The case has been referred to Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty, who will assign it to a new bench.
What had an earlier Calcutta High Court bench directed regarding Abhishek Banerjee?
A bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharya had granted Abhishek Banerjee interim protection from coercive police action, including arrest. However, the same bench directed him to fully cooperate with the CID and instructed the agency to inform the court if he failed to do so.
What was Abhishek Banerjee's counsel's argument in court?
His counsel argued that collecting voice samples was unnecessary because Abhishek had already accepted making the statements at the campaign rally. Justice Ghosh rejected this, holding that such an admission does not restrict the CID's choice of investigative steps.
