I-PAC raids row: SC defers ED plea alleging Mamata’s interference

The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned till 10 February the hearing on a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which has accused the West Bengal government and chief minister Mamata Banerjee of obstructing its recent search operations in Kolkata.

A Bench comprising justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul M. Pancholi deferred the matter after solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, sought time to respond to the counter-affidavit filed by the state government earlier in the day. Mehta told the court that the ED had received the state’s response only on Tuesday and required time to examine it and file a rejoinder. Accepting the request, the Bench listed the matter for further hearing on 10 February.

The ED’s petition stems from its searches at the office of political consultancy firm Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC) and the residence of its co-founder Pratik Jain, during which the agency alleges that its officials were obstructed by state authorities. The central agency has sought directions for registration of FIRs against chief minister Mamata Banerjee, the state director general of police and the Kolkata Police commissioner, accusing them of interference in the lawful discharge of its duties.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had stayed FIRs lodged by the West Bengal Police against ED officials in connection with the searches, observing that the case raised serious questions about alleged interference by state agencies in a central investigation. The court had also issued notices to the chief minister and senior police officials, granting them two weeks to file their counter-affidavits.

In an interim order, the top court directed the preservation of CCTV footage and other digital records from the searched premises and surrounding areas, noting that the matter prima facie involved a “serious issue” concerning central investigations and their alleged obstruction by state agencies. It cautioned that leaving such issues unresolved could lead to “lawlessness” in one or more states. Solicitor general Mehta had described the episode as one where “mobocracy replaces democracy”, alleging intimidation of ED officials.

Opposing the ED’s plea, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the West Bengal government, questioned its maintainability. He alleged forum shopping and argued that adequate remedies were already available before the Calcutta High Court, where similar issues were pending consideration.

With IANS inputs