I-PAC case: Mamata Banerjee used state machinery to obstruct probe, ED claims before Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Enforcement Directorate on Thursday claimed before the Supreme Court that there was a "complete breakdown of law and order in West Bengal," and the state Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee used the state machinery to obstruct its probe against I-PAC office in Kolkata in respect of the Rs 2,700-crore coal smuggling case.

Making his submission before a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N V Anjaria, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the ED justified the maintainability of petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by the ED and its officers against Banerjee and others for lodging a CBI FIR.

He submitted that the 'rule of law' is a part of fundamental right of equality and when it is violated, the agency in a representative capacity and its officers in personal as well as their official capacity can approach the top court under Article 32 of the Constitution to get the relief.

The top court was hearing a plea filed by the ED on the alleged obstruction by Banerjee during a raid at I-PAC premises.

Mehta claimed that this was a case where there is illegal smuggling of coal and the total amount runs to Rs 2700 crore.

The ED and their individual officers who are also citizens of India discharging their statutory functions are seeking protection of their fundamental rights under Article 32 of the Constitution, he said.

Mehta referred to the 2019 incident involving former Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar, now TMC Rajya Sabha MP, to argue that West Bengal has a history of “arresting” federal officers to stall probes.

He further criticized the Director General of Police, stating that his presence at the site was justified in affidavits as “protection for a Z-category protectee,” but in reality, he acted as a “personal PSO” for the chief minister.

Additional Solicitor General Raju, appearing for ED officer, said that “ex-facie bogus FIRs” were registered against the officers of the anti-money laundering probe agency.

He said ED officers were victims of “wrongful confinement and theft” and could not expect a fair investigation from the West Bengal Police, who report to the very person accused of obstruction. He said the chief minister is also the home minister of the state and the ED officer cannot expect a fair and impartial investigation in the cases.

The bench, however, said that there was a problem with entertaining such petitions on behalf of state governments.

The bench pointed out that there was inherent danger if we keep on entertaining.

"This court will be flooded with Article 32 petitions. Not by individuals. By different state governments. As a court shall we discourage or shall we encourage this," the bench said.

The proceedings in the case witnessed a sharp exchange between the Solicitor General and senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy.

Guruswamy accused the ED of using the courtroom as a “social media weapon in a political campaign,” labelling the SG’s arguments as the behaviour of an “unelected crown”.

“I cannot behave like a street fighter. I maintain a dignified silence,” Mehta said.