New Delhi – The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has moved the Supreme Court seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, the state’s Director General of Police (DGP), and the Kolkata Police Commissioner, alleging obstruction of a lawful money laundering investigation. The petition, filed after the controversial search operations at political consultancy firm I-PAC, details accusations of forcible seizure of digital devices and documents, intimidation of officers, and wrongful confinement of ED personnel during the raids.

The petition, which has now come to light, presents a severe critique of the Trinamool Congress-led state administration, alleging that the “highest constitutional functionary of the state” personally led senior officials and police personnel to disrupt the investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Allegations by the ED

According to the ED, on January 8, Mamata Banerjee, accompanied by the Chief Secretary, DGP, Kolkata Police Commissioner, and around 100 police personnel, entered premises where ED officers were conducting searches under Section 17 of the PMLA. These operations were taking place at the residence of I-PAC director Pratik Jain and the office of Indian PAC Consulting Pvt Ltd.

The ED alleges that its officers were threatened, restrained, and prevented from completing the searches, while a substantial amount of files and electronic devices, including laptops and mobile phones under forensic extraction, were forcibly taken away. The petition claims that ED officers were wrongfully confined and that even the mandatory panchnama (record of the proceedings) was compromised due to the alleged intimidation.

Terming the incident as “shocking” and “unprecedented,” the ED asserts that these actions constitute multiple grave cognizable offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), including theft, robbery, dacoity, house trespass, criminal intimidation, wrongful restraint, and destruction of evidence.

Legal Grounds and Requests

In its petition before the Supreme Court, the ED invoked Articles 14, 21, and 22 of the Constitution, seeking protection for its officers from what it termed “malicious criminal prosecution” and intimidation by the West Bengal government. The agency has requested the court to direct the CBI to register cases against Mamata Banerjee and the senior police officials, arguing that approaching the state police would be futile as the accused allegedly control the local law enforcement machinery.

The petition emphasizes that the State executive cannot sit in appeal over the ‘reason to believe’ of an ED officer under the PMLA, nor adjudicate the legality of a search by physical force. Any grievance against ED actions, it contends, lies exclusively before designated judicial forums.

Context of the Investigation

The ED stated that the obstruction was intended to destroy evidence in a large-scale money laundering investigation linked to alleged illegal coal mining in West Bengal, where proceeds of crime amounting to ₹2,742.32 crore were reportedly generated. The searches were conducted after materials surfaced showing the receipt of over ₹20 crore in alleged proceeds of crime by Pratik Jain and linked entities through hawala channels.

Invoking the doctrine of parens patriae, the ED said it was acting as a guardian of the rights of citizens who are “diffused, unorganised, and unidentified victims of economic offences,” emphasizing that free and fair investigation is a fundamental facet of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Previous Pattern of Interference

The ED highlighted what it described as a pattern of interference by Mamata Banerjee whenever central agencies investigate cases involving her party or its functionaries. The agency cited prior incidents in which CBI officers were allegedly detained, intimidated, or attacked by party supporters during court proceedings or searches.

The petition notes that the ED was compelled to bypass the Calcutta High Court, as attempts to seek relief there were obstructed by disturbances in the courtroom. It cited a January 9 order of the high court that recorded the environment as “not conducive” for hearing due to a large gathering allegedly mobilized by ruling party supporters.

“The remedy under Article 226 has become illusory,” the ED argued, urging the Supreme Court to intervene to restore the rule of law and protect investigating agencies from political intimidation.

Background of the I-PAC Raids

The raids were part of ED searches at 10 locations, six in West Bengal and four in Delhi, connected to a money laundering probe linked to alleged coal smuggling kingpin Anup Majee. Among the premises searched were the Salt Lake office of I-PAC and the residence of its director, Pratik Jain.

The ED alleged that nearly ₹10 crore in proceeds of crime were routed to I-PAC through hawala channels and claimed that the firm received payments from the Trinamool Congress during the 2022 Goa Assembly elections. I-PAC has been associated with the TMC since the 2019 Lok Sabha polls and continues to work with the party ahead of upcoming elections.

Following the raids, the Kolkata Police registered cases against ED officials after complaints by Jain’s family and TMC leaders alleging theft and illegal searches. Banerjee accused the ED of attempting to steal her party’s election strategyand personally led a protest march in Kolkata, defending her entry into the premises during the searches.

Supreme Court Caveat

Anticipating the ED’s move, the West Bengal government filed a caveat in the Supreme Court over the weekend, requesting a hearing before any interim orders are passed.

The confrontation between the central investigative agency and the state government underscores the rising tensions between the ED and the Trinamool Congress-led administration in West Bengal. With the Supreme Court now seized of the matter, the focus will be on whether an independent CBI probe will be ordered into allegations of obstruction, intimidation, and interference in the high-profile money laundering investigation.

The petition is expected to be closely watched, given the political and legal implications, and could have far-reaching consequences for the ongoing coal smuggling money laundering investigation as well as the role of state governments in facilitating or obstructing central agency probes.