<p>New Delhi: West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee told the Supreme Court on Thursday that she went to the I-PAC premises on January 8 after receiving information that certain unauthorised persons had entered into the office of Pratik Jain, who had been entrusted with TMC's election work.</p>.<p>Clarifying that Banerjee did not go to the Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC) premises as chief minister, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for her, told a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi that the Trinamool Congress (TMC) supremo went there as chairman of the party.</p>.<p>"I-PAC takes care of elections in West Bengal. A formal contract was entered into by the party with I-PAC in 2021.</p>.Raids on I-PAC | 'Shocking pattern', 'raided before polls': ED Vs TMC in Supreme Court on Mamata Banerjee 'obstructing' probe.<p>"We assume ED (Enforcement Directorate) knows about it. There is a series of data kept with IPAC," Sibal said.</p>.<p>He continued saying that when the ED went there, they knew a lot of data of the party would be there.</p>.<p>"Why was the need to go there in the midst of an election? The last statement in the coal scam was recorded on February 24, 2024.</p>.<p>"What were they doing since then? Why so keen in the midst of elections? If you get hold of the information, how will we fight the elections?" he said.</p>.<p>The TMC chairman had the right to go, he said.</p>.<p>"Why should ED go to a part of the party office which has all the information?" Sibal submitted.</p>.<p>Questioning the maintainability of ED's plea, Sibal said this matter should be heard by the Calcutta High Court. He said there is a pattern of interference by ED in the name of investigation exactly when elections are due.</p>.<p>"The high court can hear it under Article 226 jurisdiction. That's the hierarchy. They are filing parallel proceedings," Sibal said.</p>.<p>He refuted ED's allegation of interference and obstruction by Banerjee and said, "The allegation that the CM took all devices is a lie. It is substantiated by their own panchnama (search record). This is just to create prejudice." Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the state government and police officers, submitted that the chief minister is a Z+ protectee and, therefore, it was the duty of DGP Rajeev Kumar to accompany her when she entered the I-PAC premises.</p>.<p>The top court described the ED's allegation that Banerjee caused "obstruction" in its probe as "very serious" and agreed to examine whether a state's law-enforcing agencies can interfere with any central agency's investigation into any serious offence.</p>.<p>It stayed the FIR filed in West Bengal against ED officials who raided the I-PAC office and the residence of its director, Pratik Jain, on January 8 and directed the state police to protect the CCTV footage of the raids.</p>.<p>The ED's plea in the apex court follows events from January 8, when ED's officials faced obstructions during the probe agency's raids at the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC in Salt Lake and the residence of its chief, Pratik Jain, in Kolkata in connection with a coal smuggling case.</p>.<p>The probe agency has claimed that Banerjee entered the premises and took away the "key" evidence related to the probe.</p>.<p>The chief minister has accused the central agency of overreach, while her party, the TMC, has denied the ED's allegation of "obstructing" its probe. The state's police have registered an FIR against ED officers. </p>
<p>New Delhi: West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee told the Supreme Court on Thursday that she went to the I-PAC premises on January 8 after receiving information that certain unauthorised persons had entered into the office of Pratik Jain, who had been entrusted with TMC's election work.</p>.<p>Clarifying that Banerjee did not go to the Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC) premises as chief minister, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for her, told a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi that the Trinamool Congress (TMC) supremo went there as chairman of the party.</p>.<p>"I-PAC takes care of elections in West Bengal. A formal contract was entered into by the party with I-PAC in 2021.</p>.Raids on I-PAC | 'Shocking pattern', 'raided before polls': ED Vs TMC in Supreme Court on Mamata Banerjee 'obstructing' probe.<p>"We assume ED (Enforcement Directorate) knows about it. There is a series of data kept with IPAC," Sibal said.</p>.<p>He continued saying that when the ED went there, they knew a lot of data of the party would be there.</p>.<p>"Why was the need to go there in the midst of an election? The last statement in the coal scam was recorded on February 24, 2024.</p>.<p>"What were they doing since then? Why so keen in the midst of elections? If you get hold of the information, how will we fight the elections?" he said.</p>.<p>The TMC chairman had the right to go, he said.</p>.<p>"Why should ED go to a part of the party office which has all the information?" Sibal submitted.</p>.<p>Questioning the maintainability of ED's plea, Sibal said this matter should be heard by the Calcutta High Court. He said there is a pattern of interference by ED in the name of investigation exactly when elections are due.</p>.<p>"The high court can hear it under Article 226 jurisdiction. That's the hierarchy. They are filing parallel proceedings," Sibal said.</p>.<p>He refuted ED's allegation of interference and obstruction by Banerjee and said, "The allegation that the CM took all devices is a lie. It is substantiated by their own panchnama (search record). This is just to create prejudice." Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the state government and police officers, submitted that the chief minister is a Z+ protectee and, therefore, it was the duty of DGP Rajeev Kumar to accompany her when she entered the I-PAC premises.</p>.<p>The top court described the ED's allegation that Banerjee caused "obstruction" in its probe as "very serious" and agreed to examine whether a state's law-enforcing agencies can interfere with any central agency's investigation into any serious offence.</p>.<p>It stayed the FIR filed in West Bengal against ED officials who raided the I-PAC office and the residence of its director, Pratik Jain, on January 8 and directed the state police to protect the CCTV footage of the raids.</p>.<p>The ED's plea in the apex court follows events from January 8, when ED's officials faced obstructions during the probe agency's raids at the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC in Salt Lake and the residence of its chief, Pratik Jain, in Kolkata in connection with a coal smuggling case.</p>.<p>The probe agency has claimed that Banerjee entered the premises and took away the "key" evidence related to the probe.</p>.<p>The chief minister has accused the central agency of overreach, while her party, the TMC, has denied the ED's allegation of "obstructing" its probe. The state's police have registered an FIR against ED officers. </p>