I-PAC raids in Kolkata: SC stays FIRs against ED officers, seeks replies; next hearing on February 3

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the FIRs registered by the West Bengal police against Enforcement Directorate (ED) officers in connection with searches conducted at the political consultancy firm I-PAC in Kolkata. The Court noted that the matter raised serious and far-reaching questions about alleged interference with investigations by central agencies.

The incident unfolded on January 8 when Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee visited I-PAC’s offices during an ongoing ED search linked to the coal smuggling case. The ED alleged that Mamata Banerjee entered the residential premises of Prateek Jain, I-PAC’s director, and took away “key evidence,” including physical documents and electronic devices. Following this, the West Bengal police registered FIRs against ED officers, prompting the central agency to approach the Supreme Court.

The apex court directed that CCTV footage from the premises be preserved, issued notices to respondents, and sought counter affidavits. The FIR stay will remain in effect until the next hearing on February 3. A Bench comprising Justices Prashant Mishra and Vipul Pancholi observed that larger issues were at stake, warning that if left unresolved, such matters could lead to lawlessness in states governed by different political parties. The Court questioned whether bona fide investigations into serious offences could be obstructed under the guise of political activity, while also noting that central agencies cannot interfere with a political party’s election work.

Representing the ED, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta alleged a disturbing pattern in West Bengal, claiming that Mamata Banerjee often intervenes during ED operations, staging protests with senior police officials. He said incriminating material was removed without authorization, residences of senior ED officers were previously gheraoed, and such actions demoralized central forces.

Opposing the plea, Kapil Sibal, representing Mamata Banerjee, argued that the petitions were not maintainable and should first be addressed by the High Court under Article 226. He claimed the ED’s timing coincided with elections, that sensitive party data was present at the premises, and that the Chief Minister had visited in her capacity as party chairperson. Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing the State and DGP, raised similar objections, citing forum shopping and arguing that the panchnama contradicted claims of obstruction. (ANI)

Also Read: I-PAC raid: West Bengal government files caveat in SC seeking hearing before any order