The Supreme Court has allowed TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee to travel abroad for three weeks to undergo eye surgery.

The Court also remarked that seeking treatment for personal illness falls within the ambit of the right to privacy. 

On August 3, 2026, the Supreme Court had asked the Calcutta High Court to take up the matter within a week. But on August 5, 2026, the Calcutta High Court dismissed his plea to travel abroad for eye treatment. Assailing the said order, Banerjee moved to the Supreme Court again.

The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana ordered, "Leave granted. No serious impediment will be caused to the ongoing investigation by allowing the Appellant to seek medical treatment. The Appellant is permitted to travel abroad for a period of three (3) weeks to undergo eye surgery. The appeal is allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. The appellant shall travel on his diplomatic passport. 2. The appellant has given an undertaking that he holds no operational passport other than the said diplomatic passport. 3. The appellant shall furnish his detailed travel itinerary, local residential address in the destination country, details of the hospital/facility where treatment will be obtained, duration of stay, and flight details. 4.The information furnished by the appellant shall be utilized by the investigating agencies strictly for official tracking purposes and shall remain strictly confidential."


Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan appeared for Banerjee, while ASG SV Raju appeared for the State of West Bengal

ASG Raju submitted that the State wanted to see the genuineness of the certificate and wanted to test what had been stated—whether he actually required any medical consultation or not.

To which Justice Bagchi said, "Let him go and get checked. In the meantime, you can initiate another criminal case if you find that the document is forged."

ASG Raju replied, "But there are 16 cases registered against him; we apprehend that he may not return. However, if his medical condition requires it, we will not object—let him undergo the tests."

Justice Bagchi remarked, "I think the State is occupied with much more serious investigations than this. All right...You have appeared in matters where individuals are alleged to be involved in much graver offenses, and no such steps were taken. So, please do not create an issue here...Every individual has a fundamental right to travel abroad and to choose their medical care."

ASG Raju submitted, "We are not denying that. But why does he require medical treatment abroad specifically?"

CJI Kant said, "What you can insist upon are measures to ensure that he joins the investigation and causes no impediment to the proceedings. That is all."

To which Sankaranarayanan added that Banerjee has a diplomatic passport issued for the Operation Sindoor outreach program, and he is willing to travel on the diplomatic passport so that embassies abroad can keep track of the movements. 

Justice Bagchi orally remarked, "We are looking at the nature of the allegations, which are the subject matter of the investigation. The allegation stems from a speech delivered during an election campaign which, according to the complainant, transgressed legal boundaries... There is no explicit injunction on his travel."

ASG Raju stated, "Nobody would have dared to register an FIR before May 5th... But we are not disputing his choice of treatment. We are only requesting an independent medical assessment along with a requisite statement."

To which CJI Kant said, "Seeking treatment for a personal illness or condition falls within the ambit of the right to privacy. It is not necessary for every personal health issue to be brought into the public domain."

The Diamond Harbour MP had moved the application before the Calcutta High Court seeking permission to travel abroad for eye treatment. Maintaining that the court was not inclined to allow the petitioner to travel abroad when the investigation was underway, Justice Bhattacharyya said there are several reputed eye clinics in Kolkata.

The Calcutta High Court had earlier extended till October 6 Banerjee's interim protection from coercive action in a case related to alleged intimidatory statements he made during the West Bengal Assembly election campaign.

Cause Title: Abhishek Banerjee v. The State of West Bengal [Crl.A. No. 3744 - 3745 / 2026]

Tags: