The Enforcement Directorate has moved the Supreme Court by filing a petition under Article 32, alleging that its investigation into the coal smuggling case linked to political consultancy firm I-PAC was deliberately obstructed by the West Bengal government and Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee. The central agency has argued that the actions of the state machinery prevented it from carrying out its statutory duties in a fair and independent manner.
In its petition, the ED has sought a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation into the events that unfolded during its search operations in Kolkata. The agency has claimed that its constitutional right to conduct an unhindered investigation was violated, and that the interference amounted to a serious breach of law. It has described the incident as an unprecedented confrontation between central investigating officers and state authorities.
The ED has laid out a detailed sequence of events in its plea, narrating what it called a “showdown” during searches at premises linked to I-PAC, a political consultancy firm that has worked closely on election strategy for Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress. According to the agency, its officers were stopped from lawfully conducting searches and seizing documents and digital material relevant to the coal smuggling probe.
The petition alleges that during the searches, physical files and electronic devices were forcibly removed from the premises in full view of senior state officials. The ED has claimed that this not only disrupted the investigation but also compromised crucial evidence linked to the alleged laundering of proceeds of crime.
The matter has intensified an already strained legal and political standoff between the central agency and the Trinamool Congress-led state government. The ED has contended that the involvement of state police personnel and senior officials in the episode amounted to obstruction of justice and undermined the integrity of its probe.
Anticipating legal action by the ED, the West Bengal government earlier filed a caveat in the Supreme Court. Through this move, the state sought to ensure that no interim order would be passed without first hearing its side of the story. The caveat was aimed at safeguarding the state’s right to present its version before any relief was granted to the central agency.
The dispute stems from ED raids carried out in Kolkata at locations associated with I-PAC, which the agency says were part of its investigation into a multi-crore coal smuggling racket. The ED has alleged that nearly Rs 10 crore in proceeds of crime were routed to I-PAC through hawala channels, and that the firm received payments from the Trinamool Congress for services rendered during the 2022 Goa Assembly elections.
Earlier, the ED had approached the Calcutta High Court seeking registration of an FIR against Mamata Banerjee, accusing her of obstructing its search operations. However, hearings in the matter were deferred after both a single-judge bench and a division bench led by the acting Chief Justice postponed proceedings until after January 14.
In response, the Trinamool Congress and I-PAC filed counter-petitions before the Calcutta High Court, strongly disputing the ED’s allegations. The party has maintained that the documents seized during the raids were related purely to election planning and campaign strategy, and therefore did not fall within the ambit of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
The Trinamool Congress has accused the ED of attempting to illegally access confidential political and strategic material under the pretext of a financial investigation. Additional complaints were also lodged by the family of I-PAC chief Pratik Jain, alleging that important documents were stolen during the searches conducted at his residence and office.
The ED has rejected these accusations, asserting that all its actions were lawful and carried out strictly in accordance with due process. It has insisted that no material unrelated to the investigation was seized and that the allegations against its officers were baseless.
Meanwhile, the Kolkata Police have initiated steps to identify ED officials accused of stealing documents during the raids. Police officials said they are examining CCTV footage, DVR recordings and witness statements, and that notices will be issued once identification is complete. FIRs have been registered under various criminal provisions, including trespass and sections of the IT Act.
Police have further alleged that ED and CRPF personnel conducted searches without proper intimation, obstructed local officers and failed to produce valid warrants. Investigations into these claims are currently underway.
With the case now before the Supreme Court, the confrontation between the central agency and the state government has entered a crucial phase. The ED has urged the top court to intervene, arguing that without judicial protection, central investigative agencies would be unable to function independently in states where they face institutional resistance.
