‘A serious issue’: SC issues notice to Mamata, stays FIRs against ED officials over I-PAC raids

“The prima facie view is that the present petition has raised a serious issue relating to the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate or other Central agencies and its interference by state agencies,” the bench said.

“For adherence to rule of law in the country and to allow each organ to function independently, it is necessary to examine the issue so that offenders are not allowed to be protected under the shield of law-enforcing agencies of a particular state. According to us,  larger questions have been raised and are involved in the present matter which, if allowed to remain undecided, would further worsen the situation, and there will be a situation of lawlessness prevailing in one or the other state considering that different outfits are governing the different places,” it said.

Stating that while it is true that a Central agency has no power to interfere with the election work of any party, the bench said, “at the same time if the Central agencies are acting bonafide to investigate any serious offence, the question arises as to whether taking shield of its party activity, the agencies can be obstructed from carrying out their investigating power in a bonafide manner.”

Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for the State of West Bengal and Director General of Police, said normally the court does not stay investigation. It can instead direct that no coercive step be taken, he said.

The bench, however, declined to do so. Justice Mishra said, “In view of Section 67 (of Prevention of Money Laundering Act), if they were armed with a letter of authorisation, they were acting in good faith.” The provision states that “no prosecution, suit or other proceeding shall lie against the government or any officer of the government for anything done or intended to be done in good faith under this Act”.

During the hearing, the bench also expressed its displeasure over the chaos that erupted before the Calcutta High Court on January 14, forcing the High Court to adjourn the hearing. “We are very much disturbed… Today it is this HC, tomorrow it may be some other HC,” Justice Mishra said.

Appearing for the ED, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the developments revealed a “shocking pattern” of the CM and her officers obstructing actions of Central agencies.

“CM barges into the premises. The DGP, the Commissioner of Police, they accompany her, they are accomplices. They sit on dharna, uniformed service officers sit on dharna with political leaders… Earlier, the office of Joint Director, CBI, was ransacked,” he said.

On the ED search at the I-PAC residence of its co-founder Pratik Jain, Mehta said, “Here there was evidence leading to a conclusion that there is some incriminating material lying in one premises of a company and premises of an individual. Officers exercising powers under Section 7 of the PMLA go there. They intimate the local police that they are going there. Then the CM and other police officers go there, barge into the house. Whatever material was collected was taken over unauthorisedly. It’s an offence of theft. She takes it away, including the mobile of one of the ED officers.”

If a blind eye is turned to this, he said, this will continue “which will encourage not only people in public life, it will encourage officials to not discharge their duty. Central forces will be demoralised and state forces will feel that yes, we can go with the CM, we can barge into somebody’s premises, collect the evidence, commit theft of the evidence and, if necessary, also sit on dharna with the CM.”

The ED urged the bench to direct authorities to suspend the officers who were present at the scene and order a departmental inquiry against them.

Referring to WhatsApp chats, Mehta said the chaos at the High Court hearing happened because the law wing of the TMC asked lawyers to be present there.

To the bench’s query on what the ED was investigating, Mehta said it was a multi-state money laundering offence involving proceeds of crime to the tune of Rs 2,742 crore derived from illegal coal mining.

“Material evidence has been gathered which disclose that Rs 20 crore of proceeds of crime arising from illegal coal mining were used through inter-state hawala networks layered through a chain of facilitations, converted into cash at Goa and channelled into I-PAC’s operational framework, by being handed over to persons executing its work. This is the I-PAC where we went,” he said.

Singhvi said, “We have serious objections to the maintainability of this petition.” He contended that the panchnama prepared by the ED on the raids disclosed that their claims of seized material being taken away was false.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for the CM, said the matter should be heard by the HC. “This matter should be heard by HC which has Article 226 jurisdiction. Then we have a right to appeal. They are filing parallel proceedings, not wanting to go to the HC on the ground of the chaos. Yesterday’s hearing was peaceful. There is nothing to assume that the hearing cannot take place,” he said.

Sibal said the TMC has a contract with I-PAC on election management and the party’s “confidential data is kept there… The first question which arises is why was there a need to go there in the midst of an election. The last statement in the coal scam was recorded in February 2024. What were they doing in 2024, in 2025, and why are they so keen in the midst of elections in 2026?… Once you get possession of that information, how are we going to fight the elections? Which  is why the chairman of the party (Mamata Banerjee) has the right to go there because it is the property of the party”.