Supreme Court to Review Trinamool Congress's Challenge Against ED's Account Freezing

The Supreme Court is preparing to hear a significant plea from the Trinamool Congress, led by Dola Sen, contesting the Enforcement Directorate's decision to freeze three of its bank accounts. This legal battle arises from allegations of money laundering, with the ED claiming suspicious transactions linked to the party. The Calcutta High Court previously denied interim relief, stating there was no prima facie case for intervention. The outcome of this hearing could have substantial implications for the party amid ongoing scrutiny and political tensions in West Bengal.

By Narendra Chaudhary Aug 2, 2026, 16:50 IST

Supreme Court Hearing on Trinamool Congress's Plea

New Delhi: The Supreme Court is set to hear a petition from the Trinamool Congress and its Rajya Sabha member Dola Sen on Monday, contesting the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) decision to freeze three of the party's bank accounts amid an ongoing money laundering investigation.

According to the court's official list, the special leave petition (SLP) will be reviewed by a Bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and Prasanna B. Varale.

The petition disputes a July 20 ruling from the Calcutta High Court, which denied interim relief against the ED's freezing order enacted under Section 17(1-A) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The issue revolves around three HDFC Bank accounts belonging to the Trinamool Congress, which were subjected to debit restrictions following the initiation of an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) on June 23, based on a prior FIR filed by the Cyber Crime Police Station in Bidhannagar.

The Calcutta High Court, in its refusal to grant interim relief, stated that there was no prima facie case that warranted intervention at this stage.

The court remarked, "This court did not find any prima facie case and balance of convenience and inconvenience in favour of the petitioners. Therefore, the interim order requested by the petitioners is denied."

The High Court noted that the ED had scrutinized the party's bank accounts and identified significant fund transfers to various entities, including the Carewell group, asserting that the legality of these transactions could not be determined at the interim stage.

"At the stage of granting an interim order, it is not feasible for the court to assess whether the transfers are legal or not. The petitioners will have the chance to present their concerns before the Adjudicating Authority," the High Court stated.

Justice Rao also mentioned that the ED had frozen only six accounts, while the party still had access to 36 other accounts with deposits exceeding Rs 164 crore.

Simultaneously, the High Court dismissed the ED's initial objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, affirming that it was properly filed by an authorized representative of the party. It also ruled that the presence of an alternative statutory remedy did not prevent the High Court from addressing claims of arbitrariness in the initiation of the ECIR.

The ED's restrictions were imposed after identifying allegedly suspicious transactions totaling Rs 164 crore. Prior to the ED's intervention, the accounts had already faced debit restrictions imposed by the bank at the behest of the West Bengal Police. The freezing action was prompted by a complaint alleging that funds linked to illegal activities, including misuse of influence and dishonest financial dealings, were funneled through these accounts.

Following the complaint, the Cyber Crime Police registered an FIR under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act, leading to the ED's registration of an ECIR under the PMLA. The Trinamool Congress has argued that the freezing measures were arbitrary and lacked specificity in identifying any proceeds of crime, claiming that these actions are part of a broader pattern of coercive tactics against the party following the political shift in West Bengal.