The Enforcement Directorate on Thursday told the Supreme Court that West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has shown what it described as a troubling and recurring tendency to enter premises while statutory authorities are carrying out official proceedings. The submission was made as the top court heard the ED’s petition alleging interference during its recent search operations in Kolkata at the offices of I PAC, the political consultancy firm that works with the ruling Trinamool Congress.
The ED has approached the Supreme Court seeking directions against the West Bengal government and central authorities, including the Department of Personnel and Training and the Ministry of Home Affairs. The agency has asked for the suspension of senior police officials, among them West Bengal Director General of Police Rajiv Kumar, Kolkata Police Commissioner Manoj Kumar Verma, and Deputy Commissioner of Police for South Kolkata Priyabatra Roy, accusing them of obstructing its investigation.
Appearing for the ED, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General S V Raju argued that a disturbing pattern was evident. Citing previous instances, Mehta said that whenever statutory bodies exercised their legal authority, the chief minister allegedly intervened directly. He told the court that senior officers accompanied her, accused them of acting in concert, and recalled earlier incidents where officials sat in protest alongside political leaders. He also referred to past episodes where the residence of a senior CBI officer was surrounded and stones were allegedly thrown, according to reports by LiveLaw.
Supreme Court flags disturbance in Calcutta High Court
During the hearing, the Supreme Court also took note of what it termed serious disruption in the Calcutta High Court last Friday while the I PAC raids case was being heard. Proceedings there had to be adjourned after the presiding judge remarked that there was excessive disturbance in the courtroom.
Referring to those events, Mehta told the Supreme Court that a large number of lawyers and others entered the high court during the hearing, calling it an example of mob behaviour overriding democratic processes. The bench responded by saying it was deeply concerned by what had transpired in the Calcutta High Court, PTI reported.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the West Bengal government, countered the ED’s claims. He said the chief minister did not obstruct the searches and only took away I PAC chief Pratik Jain’s laptop and his personal iPhone. According to Sibal, no seizure had taken place until around noon, and the laptop contained sensitive election related information. He argued that this was acknowledged in documents signed by the ED itself and claimed there was no disruption of the investigation. He further alleged that the ED’s actions were mala fide and aimed at accessing political material.
Sibal also questioned the timing of the raids, pointing out that they were conducted just months before the state assembly elections. He said the last statement in the underlying case cited by the ED had been recorded in February 2024 and asked why the agency had suddenly acted now. He argued that the ED was aware that I PAC held extensive party data and suggested the raids were intended to gain access to election strategy material, a move he said would unfairly impact the democratic process.
Background of the ED raids
The case is being heard by a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi, following a petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate under Article 32 of the Constitution.
Tensions escalated in Kolkata last week when Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee rushed to the residence of Pratik Jain during ED searches. She alleged that officials were attempting to seize hard disks, internal documents, and sensitive data belonging to the Trinamool Congress. Visuals from the scene showed her surrounded by police personnel, holding documents, and pushing through a crowd of media persons.
The ED said the searches were part of an investigation into a money laundering case. Raids were carried out at both Jain’s residence and the office of the Indian Political Action Committee, which provides political consultancy to the TMC and manages its IT and media operations.
