The Supreme Court criticised central agencies for “dragging their feet” in the Leaps and Bounds investigation linked to Abhishek Banerjee in the Bengal SSC scam, calling for the interrogation records.
New Delhi: In an unusual turn in a politically-charged investigation, the Supreme Court on Monday came down hard not on the accused but on the central investigating agencies, observing that they had “dragged their feet” in the custodial interrogation and probe of Leaps and Bounds Pvt. Ltd. a company linked to Trinamool Congress leader Abhishek Banerjee in the West Bengal School Service Commission (SSC) recruitment scam, with Justice Joymalya Bagchi remarking that “the less said about your agencies’ conduct, the better” [Sumit Roy v. State of West Bengal and connected matters].
The observations came from a Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, hearing the bail plea of Sumit Roy, described as an aide of Abhishek Banerjee, in a separate land-scam case. The remarks recorded below were made orally in the course of the hearing; nothing has been finally adjudicated, and the underlying allegations against all concerned remain untested.
‘The less said about your agencies’ conduct, the better’
The sharpest exchange came when the hearing turned to the pace of the Leaps and Bounds investigation. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State of West Bengal, submitted that around ₹30 crore had been transferred from the Trinamool Congress party’s account to Leaps and Bounds, which he described as a tainted company already chargesheeted in the SSC scam:
“From this account of the political party, approximately ₹30 crore was transferred to one Leaps and Bounds, a company which is under investigation, long back chargesheeted in the SSC scam.”
Justice Bagchi’s response was pointed, and directed at the investigating agencies rather than the accused:
“The extent to which your agencies dragged their feet with regard to custodial interrogation of persons in the Leaps and Bounds investigation, despite observations by various judges of the Calcutta High Court, the less said about your agencies’ conduct, the better.”
The Solicitor General offered an explanation that was itself striking that the delay was because the agencies had been compromised. He submitted that “the reason is, the agencies were substantially under the influence and control of the accused. That’s the answer.” When Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan interjected to clarify the division of labour between the agencies, the Solicitor General distinguished between the CBI’s investigation and the Enforcement Directorate’s parallel money-laundering probe.
ALSO READ: Centre Moves To Wipe Out FIRs Against Student Protesters Using Article 142
The Court presses for accountability
Justice Bagchi did not let the matter rest with the Solicitor General’s explanation, asking him to take instructions from his team about the record of judicial disquiet over the pace of the probe:
“Give me a minute. Take instructions from your Deputy Solicitor General, from your ASG and other assisting counsel… the number of times various judges of the High Court had to express despair at the agencies’ slow movement in the manner of investigation, in the intensity of interrogation of certain persons who may have been involved.”
The Solicitor General assured the Court that all relevant material would be placed on record and that nothing would be concealed from the Bench. The thrust of the Court’s concern is notable: in a case where the political controversy has centred on allegations against Banerjee and those linked to him, the Bench’s dissatisfaction was directed at the investigators at their alleged reluctance to pursue custodial interrogation despite repeated prompting from the Calcutta High Court. That framing recasts the familiar narrative of the case, raising the question not of over-zealous investigation of a political figure but of an investigation that, on the Court’s oral observation, moved too slowly.
The bail plea and the interrogation records
The immediate matter before the Court was the bail plea of Sumit Roy, who had earlier been granted interim protection from arrest in a Salboni land-grab case. Appearing for Roy, Sankaranarayanan submitted that his client had fully cooperated and answered the questions put to him, but that investigators had spent considerable time questioning him about his family and about a political party — including its recruitment process and sources of funding rather than the transaction at issue.
Sankaranarayanan told the Court that the interrogation had been fully videographed and urged the Bench to examine the recordings to see what had actually transpired, describing sessions lasting eight to nine hours a day and an alternation between two FIRs: “He has been called for this FIR for a few days. Then when there is a one-day break, he is called in the other FIR of the CID for two days, then back on this.” He submitted that while the original allegation against Roy involved a single ₹10 lakh transaction, investigators were now alleging a much larger organised operation involving the conversion and sale of government and vested land as private property, and that during questioning the alleged main accused and another person described as a driver had both denied having interacted with Roy. Taking note, the Court asked the State to produce the interrogation material, the Chief Justice observing, “We would like to see that file,” and the Solicitor General undertaking to share the audio-video recordings if available.
Background: the SSC scam and the Leaps and Bounds link
The proceedings intersect with one of West Bengal’s most consequential corruption cases the alleged irregularities in the recruitment of teachers and non-teaching staff by the West Bengal School Service Commission, which led the Supreme Court in 2025 to void the appointments of thousands of candidates. Leaps and Bounds, the company at the centre of Monday’s exchange, has figured in the investigation into that scam and has been chargesheeted; it is described in the litigation as a company linked to Abhishek Banerjee, and it is the alleged ₹30 crore transfer from the party’s account to that company that the Solicitor General placed before the Court. The land-scam case in which Roy has sought bail is a connected strand of the broader web of investigations touching the party and persons associated with it.
The hearing also connects to a parallel dispute unfolding in the Calcutta High Court, where the freezing of the Trinamool Congress’s bank accounts including the very transfer to Leaps and Bounds that the Solicitor General cited is being litigated. Taken together, the proceedings illustrate the tangle of overlapping investigations, agencies and courts that now surrounds the party’s finances. What sets Monday’s hearing apart is the direction of the Court’s criticism: rather than the machinery of investigation being accused of political overreach, it was faulted, on the Court’s oral remarks, for moving too slowly a reminder that in a court-monitored investigation the agencies answer to the Bench for the pace and integrity of their work, whichever way the political winds blow. Nothing has been decided; the Court is yet to examine the interrogation records it has called for, and the allegations against Roy, Leaps and Bounds, and all others remain untested.
For the Applicant (Sumit Roy): Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv.
For the State of West Bengal: Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General of India