Calcutta High Court Questions Sudden Freeze of TMC Accounts, Seeks Bank Details
The Calcutta High Court on Thursday directed a private bank to submit an affidavit detailing the total deposits and financial transactions in the accounts of the Trinamool Congress (TMC). Justice Saugata Bhattacharya ordered the manager of HDFC Bank's Central Plaza branch to file the affidavit by July 8.
The order came amid internal strife within the TMC, following the freezing of three of its accounts containing an alleged Rs 440 crore. The faction led by Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee moved the court after the accounts were frozen, seeking immediate intervention. TMC leader Aroop Biswas had earlier requested the bank to freeze the party's accounts, citing a 'serious dispute' within the organisation. A day later, the police lodged a First Information Report (FIR) and began an investigation.
During the hearing, the bench observed, 'What is troubling us is that the complaint was lodged on June 18 and it is omnibus. No specific allegations were made. The FIR was also registered on June 18, and the next day, the bank froze the account. It is bothering us how this happened in hot haste and what material the agency had.'
Kishore Dutta, senior counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the police had entertained an FIR based on suspicion. He noted that initially three accounts were frozen, and later another five were also frozen. 'Based on mere suspicion in a complaint, all transactions have been stopped,' he argued.
The court questioned whether it would be proper to examine the veracity of the allegations while the police were investigating. 'Let the investigation examine that. When the issue is hazy, it will not be proper for us to look into the veracity of the charges. In-depth analysis of the allegations cannot be examined now. Here, no apprehension is expressed regarding arrest. The issue is with three bank accounts… whether it is appropriate to debit-freeze the accounts during an investigation. The effort of this court is to look into what extent the debit-freeze is needed at this stage,' the bench said.
The court also asked, 'What will happen if proceeds of crime are deposited in the account as alleged. What is the option left to the investigation agency? You (petitioner) are saying debit freeze is not possible, but if allegations are that proceeds of crime are deposited in the account, then what can the agency do? What is the effect of seizing the account but not freezing?'
Initially, the court proposed to appoint retired judges as special officers to supervise the operation of the accounts by the Mamata Banerjee-led faction. However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing virtually, requested the court to defer its order for a few days. Mehta submitted that there was a comprehensive scheme and that the seizure was not an attachment. 'We have conducted an investigation. We will show the money is being siphoned. I request you to defer the order for a few days,' he said.
In response, the court noted its proposal to allow operation of the accounts temporarily. The Solicitor General raised the question of who could operate the accounts. Senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi, also appearing for the petitioner, argued that the TMC had lost the election and lost members, but a losing party cannot be paralysed by use of state machinery after an immediate FIR. 'The larger consideration is where a level playing field and a political party under Article 19 are the basis of democracy, can a friendly police force paralyse a running political party by freezing its funds?' he added.
Senior Advocate Neeraj Kaul said the Election Commission of India would decide who represents the party. He noted that the counsel for the other faction, Subrata Bhattacharya, had given an undertaking that they would not register any complaint regarding the accounts. The court is expected to hear the matter further on July 8.
