The Supreme Court of India allowed Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader and Member of Parliament Abhishek Banerjee to travel abroad for eye surgery on Monday [1].
The ruling resolves a legal conflict over the MP's right to seek specialized medical care while facing restrictions imposed by a lower court. It highlights the tension between judicial oversight of travel and the fundamental right to healthcare.
The Supreme Court decision set aside a prior order from the Calcutta High Court, which had previously denied Banerjee permission to leave the country [2]. The MP sought the court's intervention to access an overseas medical facility for treatment that could not be provided locally [3].
During the legal proceedings, the West Bengal Government said Banerjee might not return to India if he were granted permission to travel [3]. This apprehension served as the basis for the initial restriction by the Calcutta High Court [2].
The Supreme Court overruled those concerns and granted the request for medical travel. The court said Banerjee could travel abroad for a duration of three weeks [1].
Banerjee, a prominent figure within the TMC, now has the legal clearance to undergo the necessary surgical procedure. The ruling ensures that the MP can access the required eye surgery despite the earlier judicial block [2].
“The Supreme Court of India allowed Trinamool Congress leader Abhishek Banerjee to travel abroad for eye surgery.”
This ruling emphasizes the priority of medical necessity over travel restrictions in the Indian judicial system. By overturning the Calcutta High Court's decision, the Supreme Court has signaled that concerns regarding a defendant's or public official's return to the country may be secondary to urgent healthcare needs, provided the travel window is strictly limited.
