The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to allow the Trinamool Congress (TMC) to operate four bank accounts frozen by the West Bengal Police in connection with a cybercrime complaint.
A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and PB Varale was hearing a fresh plea filed by the TMC faction against the freezing of its accounts. The complaint was filed by TMC MLA Biswanath Das, alleging that funds arising from illegal activities and dishonest financial dealings were routed into certain accounts.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for TMC, questioned the basis for the police action and said the party was not claiming that it did not have funds, but that it was unable to operate the accounts.
He argued that the Election Commission of India (ECI) had not made any determination regarding the party’s funds in its recent directive to freeze the party symbol.
“ECI doesn’t make anything on funds.”, Dr Singhvi said.
Singhvi also submitted that while the police were referring to money laundering and siphoning of funds, they had not disclosed the basis for freezing the accounts.
“They talk about money laundering and siphoning but nothing on funds.. all prejudicial statements, huge cash etc”, Dr. Singhvi argued.
He further argued that the police had not given any reason for the action.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the West Bengal Police, opposed the plea. He submitted that one of the party’s office-bearers, who is also its General Secretary Sumit Roy, who had deposited ₹34 crore in cash into the party account.
The Solicitor General of India (SGI) referred to Sumit Roy, who had sought anticipatory bail after allegedly using government land in private names and subsequently selling it. Roy had failed to secure relief from the Supreme Court.
The Court noted that the larger issue concerning who was entitled to operate the funds was connected with the ongoing dispute over the TMC’s name and election symbol.
The court said that making any finding at this stage could have a substantial impact on the pending proceedings.
The Court ultimately declined to interfere with the High Court proceedings and disposed of the plea, requesting the High Court to expedite the hearing.