Supreme Court to hear ED plea alleging interference by Mamata Banerjee during I-PAC raids. The case under PMLA raises serious constitutional questions ahead of the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections, intensifying the political and legal battle.
The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear a crucial plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) alleging interference by the West Bengal government and Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee during search operations at the office of Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC).
As per the official cause list, the matter is listed for hearing on February 18 before a bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and K. V. Viswanathan. The case has drawn significant national attention due to its political sensitivity and its timing ahead of the 2026 West Bengal Legislative Assembly elections.
Hearing Deferred Earlier Due to Ill Health of Senior Counsel
The matter was adjourned last week after senior advocate Kapil Sibal sought time due to ill health. During the brief proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, informed the court that Sibal was unable to attend.
“I can’t oppose on this ground. If it can be kept on 18th February,” Mehta submitted before the bench.
Accepting the request, the Justice Mishra-led bench deferred the hearing to February 18.
ED Seeks FIR Against Chief Minister and Top Police Officials
In its plea before the apex court, the ED has sought directions to register FIRs against Chief Minister Banerjee, the state Director General of Police (DGP), and the Kolkata Police Commissioner. The federal agency has alleged obstruction of lawful duties during its simultaneous search operations conducted at the residence of Pratik Jain in Loudon Street and at I-PAC’s office in Bidhannagar.
The searches were reportedly linked to an ongoing investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), in connection with the alleged coal scam.
The ED contends that the presence of the Chief Minister and state officials during the searches created circumstances amounting to interference in a lawful federal investigation.
Mamata Banerjee Denies Allegations in Counter-Affidavit
In her counter-affidavit, Banerjee has categorically denied all allegations of interference. She asserted that her presence at the premises on January 8, 2026, was limited and solely intended to retrieve confidential and proprietary data belonging to her party, the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC).
According to the affidavit, she visited the premises after receiving information that sensitive political data linked to the party’s electoral strategy was being accessed during the searches. The data, she claimed, was vitally connected to preparations for the upcoming Assembly elections.
The affidavit stated that she “politely requested” ED officials to allow her to retrieve certain devices and files containing party data. It further claimed that ED officers did not object and permitted the retrieval of selected devices and physical documents.
After collecting the materials, Banerjee reportedly left the premises to avoid inconveniencing the officials conducting the search. The counter-affidavit also pointed out that the ED’s own panchnamas record that the searches continued peacefully and in an orderly manner after her departure.
Allegations of Mala Fide Intent and Political Timing
Banerjee has further argued that neither the Trinamool Congress nor its officials are accused in the alleged coal scam under investigation. Therefore, she contends, the ED has no authority over proprietary party data unrelated to the probe.
The affidavit also accuses the ED of acting with mala fide intent, suggesting that the search operations were conducted strategically ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections. It questions the timing of the raids, asserting that they occurred after a prolonged period of inaction and at a time when I-PAC allegedly possessed critical documents, including a proposed list of candidates for the upcoming polls.
Additionally, the counter-affidavit alleges violations of statutory safeguards under the PMLA, claiming that the ED failed to produce audio or video recordings of the search operations, as required under procedural norms.
Earlier Supreme Court Intervention
On January 15, the Supreme Court had stayed FIRs registered by the West Bengal Police against ED officials in connection with the same searches. The apex court had also directed the preservation of CCTV footage and digital storage devices containing recordings of the searched premises and surrounding areas.
The upcoming hearing is expected to address key constitutional and procedural questions, including the extent of state government involvement during federal investigations and the legal protections afforded to political parties’ proprietary data.
| Also Read: Supreme Court to hear Mamata Banerjee’s challenge to Bengal SIR |
With high political stakes and sensitive legal issues at play, the Supreme Court’s decision could have far-reaching implications for Centre-State relations and investigative procedures under financial crime laws.
All eyes are now on the apex court as it prepares to hear one of the most politically charged cases ahead of West Bengal’s 2026 Assembly elections.
