Kolkata, 20 August (H.S.) : The Calcutta High Court on Thursday strongly reprimanded a bank over the freezing of Trinamool Congress national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee’s personal bank account and questioned why he was being asked to appear in person for KYC verification when an online facility is available.

During the hearing, Justice Krishna Rao asked why Banerjee had been summoned to the bank for KYC when the process could be completed online. “Does the bank want to see Abhishek Banerjee’s face?” the judge remarked.

Appearing for Banerjee, advocate Ayan Bhattacharya told the court that his client’s bank account had been frozen and that two of his credit cards had also been blocked. He said Banerjee had not been given any clear explanation for the action. When the bank was contacted, officials cited the need for KYC verification, although Banerjee’s existing KYC is reportedly valid until December 2026.

Justice Rao questioned the bank’s decision, pointing out that online KYC facilities are now available and that even government employees are completing the process digitally. The court also objected to the language used in the letter sent by the bank asking Banerjee to complete KYC and questioned whether such a letter could be issued to a customer.

The court directed the bank to resolve the matter at the earliest and made it clear that no additional time would be granted for resolving the issue.

The bank’s lawyer told the court that there were certain internal issues and that Banerjee had therefore been asked to complete KYC in person. However, the lawyer said the details of those issues could not be made public.

Justice Rao questioned how a customer’s account could be frozen without providing an explanation if the bank was dealing with an internal issue.

The bank subsequently stated that the matter concerning Banerjee’s name, phone number and other documents was linked to an investigation by the Enforcement Directorate. The bank said it could not disclose all the details because of the ongoing investigation and that KYC verification was therefore necessary.

The judge expressed displeasure over the bank changing its explanation during the hearing. Justice Rao noted that the bank had initially cited KYC requirements as the reason for freezing the account but later referred to an Enforcement Directorate investigation. He directed the bank to clarify its position and warned it against repeatedly changing its stand.

Justice Rao also said that the bank manager could be summoned to court if necessary. He reiterated that KYC could be completed online and directed the bank to resolve the issue promptly.

During the hearing, the bank’s lawyer requested that the matter be taken up again at noon to enable the bank to clarify its position. The lawyer also said that, if necessary, a bank employee could visit Banerjee’s residence to complete the KYC process.

The court asked the bank to specify which documents would be required from Abhishek Banerjee for completing the KYC process.

---------------

Hindusthan Samachar / Satya Prakash Singh