The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday sharply criticised the West Bengal government, observing that Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee allegedly “barging into” premises during Enforcement Directorate (ED) raids was “not a happy situation” and warranted a legal remedy.
A Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N V Anjaria made the remarks while hearing a petition by the Enforcement Directorate alleging interference by the Chief Minister and state machinery during searches conducted on January 8 in Kolkata.
“The case here is that some Chief Minister allegedly barges into a government office and interferes with the Central government agency’s work. What is the remedy then? What happens if some other CM does it again?” the Bench observed, indicating that it may consider framing standard operating procedures (SOPs) for such situations.
The ED’s plea relates to searches at the office of political consultancy firm Indian Political Action Committee and the residence of its chief, Prateek Jain, in connection with a money-laundering probe linked to an alleged coal scam.
Also read: Senior lawyers spar in SC over 'ED's role' in WB's I-PAC case
According to the agency, Banerjee had visited the premises during the raids, leading to obstruction of its operations. High drama unfolded on January 8 when she reportedly reached Jain’s residence and later the I-PAC office in Salt Lake, walking out with files and electronic devices. The ED termed the incident a “gross abuse of power”.
Banerjee, however, has maintained that the raids were politically motivated and timed ahead of the West Bengal Assembly elections, due on April 23 and 29.
During the hearing, senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the state, argued that the Constitution provides remedies and suggested that the Centre could initiate appropriate proceedings rather than central agencies directly invoking writ jurisdiction.
The Bench, however, refused to adjourn the matter despite the state seeking more time to respond. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the ED, opposed the request, calling it a delay tactic.
When Divan suggested that the court could ignore the ED’s rejoinder, Justice Mishra remarked, “Why should we ignore anything? You cannot dictate. We will consider everything which is on record.”
The matter will be heard further next week, with the court signalling that it may evolve broader guidelines to address alleged interference in central investigations.
Follow us
