Calcutta HC dismisses Abhishek Banerjee's foreign eye treatment plea
What's the story
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee's plea seeking permission to travel abroad for eye treatment. The court, led by Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya, said it needed an independent medical opinion before deciding if overseas treatment was necessary. The court suggested a medical board at Kolkata's SSKM Hospital examine Banerjee, but he refused, wanting to continue with his US-based specialist.
Legal arguments
I always return after treatment, says Banerjee
Senior Advocate Rebecca John, representing Banerjee, argued that the MP had been allowed to travel abroad for treatment before and had returned each time.
"He went as many as 12 times between 2023 and 2025...I have always gone and come back. I have a wife and two children in Calcutta. I'm an MP with a diplomatic passport," John submitted.
The state opposed the plea, saying there was no medical emergency for foreign treatment.
Document scrutiny
Can it be done in India, asks court
Throughout the trial, the judge repeatedly stated that if the treatment could be effectively administered in India, there was no need for Banerjee to travel overseas.
"It is important for him to get treatment but if it can be done in Kolkata or anywhere in India then there is no need to go abroad," the court observed.
Justice Bhattacharyya proposed constituting a medical board from SSKM Hospital's Ophthalmology Department to assess if Banerjee's treatment necessitated international travel.
Court
Banerjee had undergone surgeries at Johns Hopkins
However, John said that Banerjee had undergone procedures at Johns Hopkins Hospital in the United States and needed to continue receiving treatment from the same physicians.
Based on the Supreme Court's ruling in Maneka Gandhi, John contended that the ability to go abroad is one of the fundamental rights protected by the Constitution and that Banerjee had the freedom to choose the doctor and nation where he wanted to be treated.
Application dismissal
Court dismisses plea
However, the court raised doubts over the authenticity of medical documents submitted, which didn't mention the physician's registration number or institute, making it difficult for the court to verify their credibility.
The court held that had Banerjee agreed to appear before the medical board, it would have examined the board's opinion to decide on permission.
But since Banerjee expressly declined to undergo the examination, the court held that there was no reason to keep the application pending and dismissed it.