I-PAC Row Escalates As ED To Challenge Calcutta High Court Deferment In Supreme Court

India

oi-Gaurav Sharma

The
Enforcement
Directorate
has
moved
the
Supreme
Court
with
an
Article
32
petition,
alleging
that
the
West
Bengal
government
and
Chief
Minister
Mamata
Banerjee
blocked
its
probe
in
the
I-PAC
coal
scam
case
and
seeking
a
Central
Bureau
of
Investigation
inquiry
into
events
during
recent
search
operations.

In
the
petition,
the
Enforcement
Directorate
claimed
its
“right
to
conduct
a
fair
and
independent
investigation
has
been
curtailed
by
the
state
machinery”.
The
agency
argued
that
this
alleged
interference
struck
at
the
core
of
its
powers
under
central
law
and
asked
the
Supreme
Court
to
safeguard
its
ability
to
investigate
financial
crime
in
the
state.

ED
I-PAC
coal
scam
case
raids
and
alleged
‘showdown’

The
Enforcement
Directorate
has
described
a
detailed
chain
of
events
from
the
searches
at
premises
tied
to
political
consultancy
firm
I-PAC
in
Kolkata,
calling
the
confrontation
a
“showdown”.
According
to
the
agency,
state
officials
blocked
officers
from
completing
lawful
searches
and
from
seizing
documents
and
digital
devices
that
the
team
said
were
linked
to
the
coal
smuggling
investigation.

The
petition
stated
that
physical
files
and
electronic
equipment
were
forcibly
taken
away
from
the
I-PAC
office
while
Enforcement
Directorate
personnel
watched,
and
that
senior
West
Bengal
government
officers
were
present
during
this
removal.
The
central
agency
said
these
actions
undermined
its
control
over
potential
evidence
gathered
in
the
I-PAC
coal
scam
case.

The
Enforcement
Directorate
told
the
court
that
I-PAC
has
worked
on
election
strategy
for
the
Trinamool
Congress
under
Mamata
Banerjee.
Investigators
alleged
that
proceeds
of
crime
worth
nearly
Rs
10
crore
were
channelled
to
I-PAC
through
hawala
networks,
and
said
these
funds
were
linked
to
payments
for
consultancy
services
during
the
2022
Goa
Assembly
elections.

ED
I-PAC
coal
scam
case
legal
battle
in
courts

The
stand-off
at
I-PAC
locations
triggered
a
wider
confrontation
between
the
Enforcement
Directorate
and
the
Trinamool
Congress-led
administration.
The
agency
told
the
Supreme
Court
that
police
and
other
state
authorities
interfered
with
central
officers,
which
it
said
amounted
to
obstruction
of
justice
and
damaged
the
integrity
of
the
I-PAC
coal
scam
case
investigation.

Before
the
Enforcement
Directorate
approached
the
Supreme
Court,
the
West
Bengal
government
had
already
filed
a
caveat
there.
A
caveat
is
a
request
asking
the
court
not
to
pass
any
order
without
hearing
the
caveator.
The
state
said
it
wanted
to
ensure
its
version
would
be
considered
before
any
interim
relief
went
to
the
central
agency.

Meanwhile,
on
the
judicial
side
in
West
Bengal,
the
Enforcement
Directorate
had
gone
to
the
Calcutta
High
Court
on
Friday.
The
agency
asked
for
registration
of
an
FIR
against
Mamata
Banerjee
for
allegedly
“obstructing” its
search
operations.
A
single-judge
bench
and
then
a
division
bench
headed
by
the
acting
Chief
Justice
adjourned
the
matter,
putting
off
hearings
until
after
January
14.

Trinamool
Congress
and
I-PAC
then
submitted
counter-petitions
before
the
Calcutta
High
Court,
strongly
challenging
the
Enforcement
Directorate’s
narrative
in
the
I-PAC
coal
scam
case.
The
party
said
that
materials
taken
from
the
I-PAC
office
related
only
to
poll
planning
and
campaign
strategy
work,
which
it
argued
lay
outside
the
reach
of
the
Prevention
of
Money
Laundering
Act,
2002.

Trinamool
Congress
leaders
accused
the
Enforcement
Directorate
of
trying
to
access
sensitive
political
information
under
the
cover
of
a
money
laundering
probe.
Separately,
the
family
of
I-PAC
chief
Pratik
Jain
filed
complaints
alleging
that
important
documents
were
stolen
during
the
raids.
The
Enforcement
Directorate
dismissed
these
claims
and
maintained
that
officers
followed
due
process
and
acted
within
legal
limits
at
every
stage.

With
the
matter
now
before
the
Supreme
Court,
the
clash
over
the
I-PAC
coal
scam
case
has
shifted
to
the
country’s
highest
judicial
forum.
The
Enforcement
Directorate
has
urged
the
court
to
step
in,
warning
that
without
clear
judicial
backing,
central
investigators
may
struggle
to
work
independently
in
states
where
they
allege
strong
institutional
pushback.