SC hears the case involving Mamata Banerjee and the Enforcement Directorate.
Credit: PTI Pohtos
The Enforcement Directorate told the Supreme Court on Thursday that the West Bengal government's "interference and obstruction", including by Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, in its probe and search operation at the I-PAC office and its chief's residence reflects a very shocking pattern.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, told a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi that in the past also, whenever statutory authorities exercised statutory power, Banerjee barged in and interfered.
What the ED says
SG told the court that States 'will feel they can barge in, commit theft, then sit on dharna' and 'central forces will be demoralised' by such acts while the apex court heard a plea alleging interference and obstruction by the West Bengal government in its probe and search operation at the I-PAC office.
Mehta submitted that the developments point to a disturbing pattern, stating that whenever a statutory authority discharges its lawful duties.
Banerjee allegedly intervenes, arrives at the spot along with the Commissioner of Police, and even stages a dharna, he alleged.
The ED further said that Banerjee took possession of all digital devices and three incriminating documents before leaving the spot, following which an incident report was prepared.
It was submitted that the documents were shown to the Director General of Police and the police chief, yet the incriminating material was still taken and later displayed publicly.
The ED urged the Court to consider the matter in its entirety, pointing out that despite these events, I-PAC has not even lodged a complaint.
What the West Bengal government argues
The West Bengal government has also filed a caveat in the top court, seeking that no order should be passed without hearing it in connection with the ED raids against political-consultancy firm I-PAC last week.
Meanwhile, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the TMC requested the Court to allow him to make his submissions, clarifying that he was appearing for the Chairman of the Trinamool Congress.
He submitted that the High Court must first hear the matter and deliver its judgment, after which the parties could approach the appellate forum.
He argued that parallel proceedings had now been initiated, even though the High Court had jurisdiction under Article 226, and that this was the proper hierarchy to be followed.
Sibal said that IPAC had a large amount of party data, and when the ED went there, it knew that sensitive party information would be present.
Further, the senior advocate urged the Supreme Court to take a look at the video recording, suggesting that the accusations were a blatant lie.
He argued that the last statement in coal scam recorded in February 2024, asking why the ED was in a hurry during an election year.
The hearing is underway in the court.
The I-PAC raid case
The ED had alleged that CM Mamata Banerjee entered the raid sites and took away "key" evidence, including physical documents and electronic devices, from the premises of I-PAC and obstructed and interfered with the investigation in the case.
Calcutta High Court on Wednesday disposed of the TMC's petition praying for protection of its data, saying the ED has informed that it has not seized anything from I-PAC director Pratik Jain's office and home during its raids last week.
TMC had moved the court seeking an order for preservation of personal and political data that may have been seized by the ED during its raids on these two premises on January 8.