Mamata Banerjee
The Supreme Court pulled up West Bengal Chief minister Mamata Banerjee at the hearing of the I-PAC raid case on April 22, saying that a CM of a state can't just walk in during a probe.
One can't convert such a raid into a Centre versus state face-off, the top court observed. Ambedkar would not have approved of such conduct, the court said.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) case being heard stems from a continuing legal tussle centred on allegations that Mamata Banerjee intervened during a search conducted at the offices of the Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC)
The dispute originates from ED raids carried out on January 8 in connection with a multi-crore money laundering probe tied to an alleged coal smuggling racket.
Also read | Kapil Sibal slams Centre, EC over Bengal polls, alleges ‘gross abuse’ of state machinery
The agency has claimed that Banerjee, accompanied by over 100 police personnel and senior officials, entered both the I-PAC office and the residence of its founder, Pratik Jain, while the searches were still in progress.
According to the ED, crucial material evidence -- including laptops, mobile devices and documents containing electoral data -- was removed during the operation without authorisation. The agency has argued that such actions compromised the integrity of the search.
In earlier hearings, the Supreme Court of India called out the episode as highly unusual and described it as an unfortunate development, while also flagging the lack of clear legal recourse in situations where senior state officials are accused of impeding central investigations.
Representing the ED, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta urged the court to order an inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the alleged obstruction, along with appropriate action against the Chief Minister and the state’s Director General of Police.
Also read | Abhishek Banerjee: From shadow to strategy, driving TMC’s next-gen politics
The agency has maintained that central investigative authorities should not be left without remedies in cases of physical interference with their operations.
The West Bengal government, however, has challenged the petition’s admissibility. Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the state, argued that the ED, as a government body, cannot invoke fundamental rights or directly approach the apex court under Article 32.
The state has further contended that the raids were politically driven and intended to weaken the All India Trinamool Congress ahead of the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections.
Separately, Vinesh Kumar Chandel, co-founder of I-PAC, was arrested on April 13, following which the organisation is said to have curtailed or temporarily halted its activities in the state. A Delhi court later remanded him to 10 days in ED custody in connection with the money laundering investigation linked to the alleged coal pilferage case, with custody expected to continue until April 23 for further questioning.
One can't convert such a raid into a Centre versus state face-off, the top court observed. Ambedkar would not have approved of such conduct, the court said.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) case being heard stems from a continuing legal tussle centred on allegations that Mamata Banerjee intervened during a search conducted at the offices of the Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC)
The dispute originates from ED raids carried out on January 8 in connection with a multi-crore money laundering probe tied to an alleged coal smuggling racket.
Also read | Kapil Sibal slams Centre, EC over Bengal polls, alleges ‘gross abuse’ of state machinery
The agency has claimed that Banerjee, accompanied by over 100 police personnel and senior officials, entered both the I-PAC office and the residence of its founder, Pratik Jain, while the searches were still in progress.
According to the ED, crucial material evidence -- including laptops, mobile devices and documents containing electoral data -- was removed during the operation without authorisation. The agency has argued that such actions compromised the integrity of the search.
In earlier hearings, the Supreme Court of India called out the episode as highly unusual and described it as an unfortunate development, while also flagging the lack of clear legal recourse in situations where senior state officials are accused of impeding central investigations.
Representing the ED, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta urged the court to order an inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the alleged obstruction, along with appropriate action against the Chief Minister and the state’s Director General of Police.
Also read | Abhishek Banerjee: From shadow to strategy, driving TMC’s next-gen politics
The agency has maintained that central investigative authorities should not be left without remedies in cases of physical interference with their operations.
The West Bengal government, however, has challenged the petition’s admissibility. Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the state, argued that the ED, as a government body, cannot invoke fundamental rights or directly approach the apex court under Article 32.
The state has further contended that the raids were politically driven and intended to weaken the All India Trinamool Congress ahead of the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections.
Separately, Vinesh Kumar Chandel, co-founder of I-PAC, was arrested on April 13, following which the organisation is said to have curtailed or temporarily halted its activities in the state. A Delhi court later remanded him to 10 days in ED custody in connection with the money laundering investigation linked to the alleged coal pilferage case, with custody expected to continue until April 23 for further questioning.
