The Calcutta High Court closed a petition filed by TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee after his frozen bank accounts and cards were reactivated following KYC compliance. The court criticized banks for blocking services without prior notice.

  • Abhishek Banerjee's bank account and cards reactivated post-KYC submission.
  • Calcutta High Court ruled that banks must issue notices before blocking services.
  • Bank cited 'high-risk' factors and ED-linked data for the automatic freeze.

The Calcutta High Court on Monday disposed of a petition filed by Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee after a private bank restored access to his bank accounts, debit cards, and credit cards. The restoration followed the submission of necessary KYC (Know Your Customer) documents.

Banerjee had approached the court claiming that his financial access was severed on August 10, coincidentally the same day the Supreme Court granted him permission to travel abroad for medical treatment. His legal counsel emphasized the urgency, noting that the Diamond Harbour MP had scheduled international travel for the current week.

Read Also:Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s Jail Diary Becomes Top Seller at Kashmir Book Festival

Why This Matters

BozokMedia analysis shows that this incident highlights the tension between automated banking risk-management systems and individual consumer rights. When high-profile individuals are linked to investigations by agencies like the Enforcement Directorate (ED), banks often trigger 'high-risk' flags. However, this case establishes a judicial precedent that procedural fairness—specifically the issuance of a notice—must precede the restriction of financial services.

The judicial observation reinforces that regulatory compliance cannot be used as a tool for immediate financial disenfranchisement without due process.

During the proceedings, Justice Krishna Rao observed that banks should first issue a formal notice seeking the required KYC updates rather than blocking cards at the outset. The court noted that blocking services should be a last resort, applicable only if the customer fails to comply after repeated reminders.

Representing Banerjee, lawyer Ayan Bhattacharjee argued that according to RBI guidelines, any freezing of an account must be done in a phased, partial manner. Conversely, the bank's legal team maintained that there was no intention to harass the customer. They explained that the account was automatically blocked by a central team based on third-party data and a high-risk factor associated with the client's profile.

The bank further revealed that Banerjee's PAN and mobile numbers were linked to cases initiated by the Enforcement Directorate, which contributed to the system-generated block. The matter was closed once the bank confirmed that all documents had been submitted at the MP's residence and services were fully restored.

Did You Know?: Under RBI's Master Direction on KYC, banks are required to perform 'Periodic Updation' of customer records based on the risk categorization (Low, Medium, or High) of the client.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why was Abhishek Banerjee's account frozen?
The bank stated the account was flagged as 'high-risk' due to third-party data and links to cases initiated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

2. What is the court's stance on blocking bank accounts?
The court ruled that banks must first notify the customer to provide missing information and should only block services if the customer ignores those requests.