Supreme Court dismisses Mamata Banerjee led TMC plea seeking permission to operate four debit-frozen bank accounts holding approximately 804 crore rupees. A apex court bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice P.B. Varale declined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution, leaving the matter under the purview of the Calcutta High Court.

The Supreme Court refused to disturb the Calcutta High Court interim decision, which had earlier declined to grant further relief on operating the four public sector bank accounts. The bench requested the High Court to expedite the pending main hearings regarding the legitimacy of the freezing orders passed by law enforcement agencies.

Why Did Supreme Court Decline To Intervene Financial Dispute?

The judges observed that the Election Commission of India has frozen the party symbol while adjudication continues over the larger dispute regarding which faction represents the real organisation. The Supreme Court noted that since the issue of political entitlement remains pending before constitutional authorities, it would refrain from evaluating the merits of the financial claims.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Mamata Banerjee-led faction, submitted that freezing the Indian Bank accounts severely crippled administrative functions and routine operational expenses. In response, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and counsel for the complainant highlighted that an earlier High Court arrangement already allowed the party access to specified accounts for day-to-day administrative running costs.

The financial operations stay tied to the High Court proceedings and the Election Commission adjudication. The party continues operating under existing High Court mechanisms while awaiting expedited hearings in Kolkata after the judicial recess.