“ED has been weaponised” vs “ED has been terrorised”: Heated debate in Supreme Court on Mamata Banerjee case

Bureau Prayagraj. In the case filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and others over alleged obstruction during searches at the I-PAC office, the agency told the Supreme Court that it was not “weaponized” but “terrorized”. Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju made this comment in response to the argument of senior advocate Siddharth Luthra in which he had alleged weaponization (political use) of the agency.

Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice K.V. Vishwanathan’s bench listed the matter for March 18. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the court that the ED is going to file its rejoinder. This petition has been filed by ED under Article 32 of the Constitution, alleging that West Bengal Police officials and the state administration obstructed the work of the agency during the searches conducted on January 8 at the I-PAC office in Kolkata.

In the last hearing, the Supreme Court had stayed further action in three FIRs lodged by the West Bengal Police against ED officials and had said that the matter was serious and its investigation was necessary, otherwise a “situation of lawlessness” could arise in the state. The court had also directed the state government to preserve CCTV footage and other electronic evidence of the search site and surrounding areas.

Relates to money laundering investigation related to coal scam. ED alleges that during the search, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee reached the spot along with senior party leaders, had a heated conversation with the officials and took some documents with her, which affected the investigation. According to the agency, the presence of the Chief Minister and the incident of alleged removal of documents intimidated the officials and hindered the independent functioning of the agency. ED has also accused the state administration of repeatedly not cooperating.

At the same time, West Bengal Police has also registered an FIR against ED officers. In its petition filed in the Supreme Court, the ED has sought an independent investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), saying the central agency is necessary for an impartial investigation due to alleged interference by the state executive. Earlier, ED had also approached Calcutta High Court regarding the same incident. On January 14, the High Court, while disposing of the petition filed by Trinamool Congress, had recorded the ED’s statement that no material was seized from the I-PAC office or its director Prateek Jain.