No relief for Mamata Banerjee: Supreme Court refuses to release ₹440 crore from TMC’s frozen bank accounts

The Supreme Court has declined to grant relief to TMC. This concerns its frozen bank accounts, holding around ₹440 crore. A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and PB Varale heard the matter on 11 August.

TMC earlier challenged the Calcutta High Court's 20 July order. That order refused permission to operate three HDFC accounts. It also challenged a related order dated 9 July.

A separate petition was filed by rebel leader Biswanath Das. He challenged the same 9 July order, too. Das claims to represent the party's genuine leadership.

The Supreme Court disposed of both petitions without granting relief, according to LiveLaw. It called the High Court's order "balanced". Justice Sundresh said all contentions remained open elsewhere.

He clarified that issues could be raised in the main petition. This petition currently remains pending before the Calcutta High Court.

The Court left decisions to the court-appointed Special Officer instead. Justice Sundresh noted that the 9 July order had allowed daily operations. This ensured party functions weren't completely stalled.

Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Menaka Guruswamy represented Mamata Banerjee’s TMC. Additional Solicitor General SV Raju appeared for the ED. Senior Advocate K Parameshwar represented rebel leader Biswanath Das, according to LiveLaw.

The ED's freeze relates to a money laundering investigation. It concerns alleged fund transfers to Carewell Aviation India. This involved a purported acquisition of an aircraft and a helicopter.

TMC’s argument

Kapil Sibal referred to the amount of money represented in the alleged proceeds of crime.

“The alleged proceeds of crime are ₹60 crores. Bank has more than ₹400 crores. Why should all of it be frozen?” LiveLaw quoted Sibal as asking.

He said this prevented TMC from meeting basic obligations. This included salary payments for around 250 employees. Monthly salaries currently total around ₹53.23 lakh, he said.

Sibal also cited pending payments for security and office services. Total monthly expenditure across 17 offices reached roughly ₹1 crore.

ASG Raju countered that ₹125 crore currently remained available. He said that three accounts were already allowed for daily operations. These accounts were reportedly free from ED encumbrance.

Sibal disputed this claim, saying accounts were actually encumbered. Raju offered to file an affidavit clarifying the position.

Justice Sundresh clarified that the Court wasn't examining factional disputes. It focused only on providing limited interim relief instead.

Parameshwar, representing the rival faction, opposed TMC's request. He argued that the interim arrangement favoured only one faction. He questioned how one group could control party accounts on its own.

He alleged financial irregularities existed within the frozen accounts. He also claimed one account had recently received ₹360 crore. This came shortly after the party lost the election.

Menaka Guruswamy countered that some unencumbered accounts served specific purposes. These included newspaper funds and member welfare accounts specifically. She argued these couldn't simply cover salaries or rent.

The Supreme Court declined to resolve these “factional disputes”. It left objections to be raised before the Special Officer. Broader issues remain pending before the High Court.

The case originated from a complaint filed in June. Biswanath Das had alleged illegal routing of funds through HDFC accounts. The ED subsequently froze 6 bank accounts in July.