Outlook Explains | From Health Camps To FIRs: What Happened To Abhishek Banerjee's Diamond Harbour Model?

What began as an ambitious healthcare outreach programme in Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Abhishek Banerjee's Diamond Harbour constituency has become the centre of a growing political and legal controversy. Sebaashray, launched in January 2025 as a free healthcare initiative, was presented by Banerjee as a model that could bring large-scale medical services closer to people. The programme later expanded beyond Diamond Harbour.

But in recent months, multiple complaints and FIRs have alleged medical negligence, unauthorised medical facilities and violations of regulations governing medicines and diagnostic equipment. The allegations are being investigated and have not been established in court. The controversy now raises a larger question: can a constituency-level welfare model built around a powerful elected representative be transformed into a wider political template when its implementation comes under legal scrutiny?

What was the Diamond Harbour Model?

The "Diamond Harbour Model" refers to the system of constituency-level development and public outreach associated with Banerjee, the TMC's national general secretary and Diamond Harbour MP.

The model combined infrastructure projects with direct welfare interventions, including health and pension camps. The idea was to make an elected representative's constituency a showcase of visible, targeted service delivery rather than relying entirely on conventional government welfare mechanisms. The Indian Express has described the model as involving fast-tracked development projects as well as health and pension camps.

Its political significance went beyond individual projects. Banerjee's overwhelming victory from the constituency in the 2024 Lok Sabha election strengthened the perception that the model had political value.

Sebaashray was perhaps its most ambitious expression.

How did Sebaashray become its flagship?

Banerjee launched Sebaashray on January 2, 2025, describing it as a mass healthcare initiative designed to provide free medical services to people in Diamond Harbour. The programme involved medical camps offering consultations, diagnostic services and referrals for further treatment.

According to India Today, the original programme was planned as a large-scale operation backed by hundreds of doctors and diagnostic facilities, with an ambitious target of reaching millions of people.

Banerjee subsequently claimed that the first 75-day phase had helped more than 12 lakh people, and in 2025 challenged MPs from other parties to replicate the model.

The programme was subsequently expanded. Sebaashray 2 was launched in 2026, with Banerjee continuing to present the initiative as an example of accessible healthcare. His own public messaging described it as a model intended to make healthcare available beyond Diamond Harbour as well.

That expansion also increased the programme's political visibility.

Why did the health camps attract political attention?

Sebaashray was unusual because it occupied a space between constituency service, healthcare delivery and political outreach.

A local MP was using his political network to provide services that people might otherwise struggle to access.

But the same features made it politically contentious. Opposition parties questioned whether a political leader should be operating large-scale medical outreach outside the normal government healthcare system and whether the camps complied with medical regulations.

The controversy intensified after complaints began alleging irregularities in the functioning of the camps. The BJP has argued that the programme involved unauthorised medical activity, while the state health department has sought records and initiated scrutiny.

What are the allegations in the FIRs?

Several complaints have now resulted in FIRs against Banerjee and others associated with the programme.

One set of allegations concerns the qualifications of people working at the camps. A complainant alleged that medical students from government colleges were presented as doctors and that diagnostic equipment, including X-ray and ECG machines, was used in violation of applicable laws. Another complaint alleged that ultrasound machines were used in violation of provisions of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act. The cases also invoke provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the National Medical Commission Act and the West Bengal Clinical Establishments Act.

A second FIR was registered in July after a complaint alleging unauthorised medical centres, improper use of medicines and diagnostic equipment and other irregularities.

The most serious allegations involve individual patients.

In one case, the husband of a woman named Malati Biswas alleged that she attended a Sebaashray camp for chronic knee pain, was prescribed medication and later underwent treatment at government hospitals before ultimately having her leg amputated following a vascular complication. An FIR was registered following his complaint.

There has also been regulatory action involving diagnostic equipment. The West Bengal Health Department cancelled the licence of a private clinic after finding that an ultrasound machine had allegedly been moved to a Sebaashray camp without the required permission.

What does Abhishek Banerjee say?

Banerjee's public position on Sebaashray has largely focused on defending the programme as a healthcare initiative rather than responding to every individual allegation.

Before the controversy intensified, he repeatedly presented Sebaashray as a successful model of public service. In June 2025, he said the initiative had helped more than 12 lakh people and challenged MPs across parties to replicate the 75-day model.

Following the FIRs, however, there was initially no detailed public response from Banerjee. Reports in early July noted that he had not issued a statement on the allegations.

The political context is important. The allegations have emerged after a change in the political environment in West Bengal, with the BJP using the FIRs to attack Banerjee and the TMC. Banerjee has separately accused investigative agencies of political targeting in other cases and has maintained that he will not be intimidated by such proceedings.

Until the investigations establish what happened at individual camps, allegations against the programme should therefore remain allegations rather than conclusions.

From constituency model to political template?

That is perhaps the most consequential question surrounding Sebaashray.

Banerjee had deliberately positioned the programme as something other elected representatives could replicate. The health camps were not simply presented as a local welfare measure; they were held up as a model of constituency-level public service.

If successful, such a model offers political leaders a powerful formula: identify a visible public need, mobilise a political network around it and create a direct relationship between the representative and beneficiaries.

But the Sebaashray controversy illustrates the risks of scaling such a model. Healthcare is a heavily regulated sector, and the larger the operation becomes, the greater the need for qualified personnel, licensed facilities, proper diagnostic equipment, medical records and regulatory oversight.

The political value of the Diamond Harbour Model therefore depends not merely on how many people it reaches, but on whether it can demonstrate that services are delivered according to established standards.