New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear on Thursday a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) alleging obstruction and interference by the West Bengal government, including Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, during a search operation at the offices of I-PAC and the residence of its director, Pratik Jain. The probe is linked to an alleged multi-crore coal-pilferage scam.

According to the apex court’s cause list, a bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi is likely to hear the matter. The West Bengal government has filed a caveat in the Supreme Court, seeking a direction that no order be passed without giving it an opportunity to be heard. A caveat ensures that a litigant is informed before any judicial action adversely affecting it is taken.

The ED has alleged in its plea that Banerjee personally entered the raid sites and removed “key” evidence, including physical documents and electronic devices, from I-PAC premises. The plea asserts that her actions intimidated ED officials and compromised the agency’s ability to carry out its statutory functions independently. The central probe agency has also claimed repeated obstruction and non-cooperation by the state administration and requested the Supreme Court to direct an independent inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), arguing that a neutral central agency is necessary in light of the alleged interference by the state executive.

Before approaching the Supreme Court, the ED had sought recourse at the Calcutta High Court on January 9, requesting a CBI probe into Banerjee’s alleged actions. The agency claimed that the Trinamool Congress (TMC) chief, allegedly with the aid of the state police, removed incriminating documents from its custody during the January 8 raid at Jain’s residence. The Calcutta High Court adjourned the hearing on the ED’s plea on Wednesday while disposing of a separate petition by the TMC seeking protection for its data. The court noted that the ED had clarified it had not seized any materials from Jain’s office or residence during its raids.

The I-PAC raids were carried out as part of an investigation into alleged money laundering and the purported misappropriation of funds from coal operations. During the operation, Banerjee reportedly arrived at the I-PAC office with senior TMC leaders, confronted ED officials, and allegedly took away documents. The Chief Minister has described the ED’s actions as overreach by a central agency, while the TMC has maintained that the ED’s raid was intended to access confidential election strategy material rather than pursue a legitimate probe.

The West Bengal Police has also lodged a First Information Report (FIR) against the ED officers involved in the raids, highlighting the ongoing tension between the state government and the central investigative agency. The TMC has categorically denied allegations of obstruction, arguing that the ED’s actions were politically motivated and aimed at disrupting the party’s electoral preparations ahead of the upcoming Assembly polls.

Political observers note that the developments come at a sensitive time, with West Bengal Assembly elections just months away, making the I-PAC raids and the accompanying legal disputes highly consequential for both administrative and political considerations. The Supreme Court’s intervention is being closely watched for its potential to clarify the limits of central agency powers, the accountability of state authorities, and the procedural safeguards for sensitive investigative operations.

The case underscores broader issues of federal balance, administrative accountability, and the role of investigative agencies in politically charged environments. The ED’s plea to the Supreme Court reflects concerns over maintaining the integrity and independence of federal investigations in cases where state-level interference is alleged. Meanwhile, the TMC has framed the matter as a political campaign targeting the party’s internal strategists, asserting that I-PAC functions as a legitimate political consultant.

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the matter, key questions include the extent to which a state executive can engage with central investigative proceedings, the procedural protections afforded to political and non-political entities under investigation, and the potential oversight mechanisms to ensure unhindered federal probe agency operations. The upcoming hearing on Thursday is likely to set important precedents concerning inter-agency coordination, federal authority, and the boundaries of political intervention in sensitive investigations.

The unfolding legal and political tussle highlights the intersection of law, governance, and politics in India, especially in the context of electoral preparations and governance accountability. Both the ED and the West Bengal government have positioned themselves strategically, framing their actions through narratives of law enforcement versus political overreach, making the Supreme Court’s ruling potentially significant not only for the I-PAC case but also for the broader federal governance framework in India.