
The Supreme Court on Thursday (1 October) dismissed a plea by the Mamata Banerjee-led TMC faction seeking permission to operate four debit-frozen bank accounts, declining to interfere with a Calcutta High Court order. A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and PB Varale said it was not inclined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 136 and asked the high court to expedite the hearing.

The court noted that the Election Commission has frozen the party symbol and the larger question of who is entitled to the funds remains pending. The TMC had sought to operate four accounts holding around Rs 804 crore that were frozen by the West Bengal Police. The Enforcement Directorate has separately frozen Rs 440 crore in three accounts linked to a money laundering probe involving an alleged Rs 160 crore scam through aircraft purchases.
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi argued the freeze was paralysing the party's political activities, citing a need for Rs 12.15 crore monthly. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta countered that a complaint alleged a lawmaker's secretary deposited Rs 35 crore in cash into those accounts. The Calcutta High Court will hear the matter after the Durga Puja vacation.
Update, 1 October 2026: India TV now also reports the story, confirming the Supreme Court's dismissal and the August 27 Calcutta High Court order refusing interim relief. It adds that the high court will hear the matter after the Durga Puja vacation, during which parties will file affidavits. No new fact beyond the eight other sources.
Coverage is uniform straight reporting across all eight outlets. Every source leads with the Supreme Court's dismissal and the Article 136 refusal, then quotes the bench's direction to expedite the high court hearing and the EC's symbol freeze. The Hindu, Deccan Herald and The Federal (via PTI) reproduce near-identical wire copy. Times of India adds the ED's separate Rs 440 crore freeze and the aircraft allegation, while Times Now and India TV focus on the Rs 440 crore and Rs 804 crore figures respectively. Hindustan Times provides the most detailed hearing account, including Singhvi's Rs 19 crore initial claim and Mehta's Rs 35 crore cash deposit allegation. No outlet adopts a partisan or sensationalist framing. The accounts will remain frozen until the entitlement question before the EC is settled, the high court resumes after the Puja holidays.
Coverage: 8 sources, 8 neutral
Sources (8): timesofindia.indiatimes.com (neutral report), thehindu.com (neutral report), verdictum.in (neutral report), hindustantimes.com (neutral report), deccanherald.com (neutral report), timesnownews.com (neutral report), thefederal.com (neutral report), indiatvnews.com (neutral report)
This brief was synthesised by AI from the 8 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry. Methodology and corrections.
Update, 2 October 2026: further reports on this story from economictimes.indiatimes.com, timesofindia.indiatimes.com.