The Enforcement Directorate told the Supreme Court that Mamata Banerjee “illegally barged” into the I-PAC raid site and interfered with a money laundering investigation. The ED has sought a CBI probe, alleging seizure of key evidence and obstruction of lawful proceedings under PMLA.
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has strongly criticised West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee before the Supreme Court of India, accusing her of serious misuse of power during a search operation conducted at the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC on January 8.
In its submissions, the ED alleged that the Chief Minister committed a “gross and blatant abuse” of authority by “illegally barging” into the premises where ED officials were carrying out raids in connection with a Rs 2,742-crore coal smuggling and money laundering case.
ALSO READ: ED vs Mamata Banerjee| I-PAC Raids Row: Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing to Mar 18
The central agency has now sought a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Ms. Banerjee and certain senior police officers of West Bengal for allegedly interfering with the investigation and removing crucial evidence from the site.
The case relates to alleged illegal coal mining and smuggling, with proceeds of crime said to have been laundered through complex financial channels. According to the ED, part of these funds was routed through inter-State hawala networks, layered through various intermediaries, converted into cash in Goa, and then channelled into the operational structure of I-PAC by being handed over to individuals working on its projects.
“It was under these circumstances that the search was conducted,”
the ED told the Court.
The controversy began when the ED conducted searches at the offices of Indian PAC Consulting Private Limited (I-PAC), a political consultancy firm that works with the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC). The residences of I-PAC founder Pratik Jain were also searched as part of the investigation.
The West Bengal government and Ms. Banerjee, however, argued that the raids were carried out without informing or taking permission from the State Police. They claimed that the operation was aimed at seizing confidential and proprietary material related to the ruling party.
The ED rejected these allegations. It denied the State’s claim that the Chief Minister and police officers had intervened to stop
“armed persons impersonating officials of Central agencies”
from conducting an illegal search. According to the ED, its officials had properly displayed their identity cards and search authorisations to the police officers present at the scene.
The agency further alleged that the State Police not only allowed the Chief Minister to enter the premises but actually escorted her inside while the search was in progress. The ED claimed that this action directly disrupted lawful proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
In its detailed rejoinder before the Supreme Court, the ED stated:
“Individuals took away documents collected and indexed by the ED officers. The back-up process for the computer and email dump was also stopped midway. Ms. Banerjee, assisted by the State police officers, forcibly took away the computer installed in the premises. The State police on the instructions of Ms. Banerjee forcibly took away the mobile phones of the employees of M/s Indian PAC Consulting Pvt. Ltd., present at the premises. They took the laptop of the ED officer and a mobile phone of the officer and returned it after two hours. The taking of the laptop and mobile phone and keeping in their possession for two hours amounts to theft,”
the ED submitted.
The agency also alleged that Ms. Banerjee entered the premises with her Z-plus security personnel, individuals in plain clothes, and senior officers of the Kolkata Police, showing what it described as a clear display of force.
“The heavy presence of police personnel to the tune of hundreds itself demonstrates coercion by the State Police and interference with lawful search under the PMLA by the ED officers… The manner of entry constituted a clear show of force and numerical strength, during which documents and incriminating material were forcibly taken over and removed from the premises, despite repeated requests by ED officers to refrain from doing so… No investigation agency would ordinarily permit a third person to enter into premises of an ongoing search and take away materials,”
the ED submitted.
The ED also responded to the Chief Minister’s claim that the material taken from the site only contained confidential information of the AITC. It argued that once the material was forcibly removed, it became impossible to verify what exactly was taken and whether it included evidence related to the ongoing investigation.
“Once such material has been forcibly retrieved and taken away, it becomes difficult to identify what all was taken away and determine whether or not they were only confidential and proprietary information of the party or whether they also contained information relating to the offence which was being investigated into by the ED,” the rejoinder said.
The agency further expressed shock at the State’s internal response to the incident. It said it was “utterly shocking” that the Home Secretary gave the CM, who had barged into and stopped a legal raid, a “clean chit”.
In strong words, the ED accused the West Bengal State machinery of collusion and obstruction.
“The bare perusal of the facts would reveal gross abuse of power by the State machinery of the State of West Bengal. Senior officials of the State Police have colluded and obstructed the discharge of functions by officials of the ED under the PMLA, in the private interests of Ms. Mamta Banerjee the Chief Minister of the State of West Bengal,”
the ED underscored.
The agency also pointed out that there was no indication that any official office of the AITC was located at the I-PAC premises.
“There was no information whatsoever in public domain that any office of AITC was located in the premises of Indian-PAC Consulting Private Limited. There was no visible sign board or any form of display in the name of AITC”.
The ED’s submissions have now placed the matter squarely before the Supreme Court, raising serious constitutional questions about federal powers, the functioning of central investigative agencies, and the alleged misuse of State authority.
The Court is expected to examine whether the actions of the Chief Minister and the State Police amounted to unlawful interference in a central investigation under the PMLA and whether a CBI probe is warranted in the circumstances.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Mamata Banerjee
