/industry-wired/media/agency_attachments/2024/12/04/2024-12-04t130344212z-iw-new.png)
/industry-wired/media/agency_attachments/2024/12/04/2024-12-04t130332454z-iw-new.jpg)
/industry-wired/media/media_files/2026/01/13/untitled-design-14-2026-01-13-18-16-58.png)
/industry-wired/media/member_avatars/2025/07/24/2025-07-24t110241870z-somatirtha-2025-07-23-15-35-15-2025-07-24-16-32-49.png)
ED Moves SC Against Mamata, Alleges Obstruction and Evidence Seizure in I-PAC Coal Probe
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has left the Supreme Court in a difficult situation with a writ petition against Mamata Banerjee, alleging threats, intimidation, and wrongful obstruction of its officers during search operations conducted in Kolkata on January 8. The raids were conducted in connection with the multi-crore coal pilferage scam.
The petition, filed by three ED officers who were part of the search team in West Bengal, names the West Bengal government and the Chief Minister as respondents. The agency has also sought a court-monitored investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the alleged obstruction.
ED’s Allegations
In its petition, the ED makes serious allegations against Banerjee, Director General of Police Rajeev Kumar, and Kolkata Police Commissioner Manoj Verma. The agency alleges that the Chief Minister and senior police officials forcibly entered the premises under search and disrupted a lawful operation.
According to the ED, Banerjee, accompanied by over 100 police personnel, entered the Loudon Street residence of Pratik Jain at around 12:05 pm and interfered with the seizure process. The agency alleges that the laptops, mobile phones, and physical documents confiscated during the search were all taken away by truck, thus causing destruction and removal of important evidence.
The ED has alleged that its officers were threatened and harassed, and that the operation was rendered impossible due to the presence of the Chief Minister and senior police officials. It further claims that a ‘pre-planned disturbance’ was orchestrated by supporters of the All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) through WhatsApp groups ahead of related proceedings in the Calcutta High Court, with attempts made to disrupt judicial processes.
Link to Coal Pilferage Scam
The searches at the premises of the Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC) and Pratik Jain were conducted as part of a money laundering probe linked to the alleged Rs 2,742 crore coal pilferage scam in West Bengal. The ED is investigating the alleged diversion and laundering of proceeds generated through illegal coal mining and transportation.
The agency maintains that the searches were strictly financial in nature and aimed at tracing money trails. It has not named I-PAC as an accused entity but claims that the seized devices and documents were relevant to the probe.
Bengal Government’s Response
On January 10, the West Bengal government filed a caveat in the Supreme Court, requesting that no order be passed without hearing the state. A caveat is a legal safeguard that prevents ex parte orders against a party.
The West Bengal CM has made charges against the ED, claiming that they have exceeded their limits and targeted politics. Besides, he has accused the central government of misusing its agencies against states where the opposition holds power. TMC leaders have echoed this charge, calling the raid a politically motivated act ahead of key electoral battles.
I-PAC’s Stand
I-PAC has strongly criticised the ED raids, calling them an “unsettling precedent” for professional political consulting firms. However, the organisation said it would extend full cooperation with the investigation.
“We do not contest elections or hold political office. Our role is limited to transparent and professional political consulting,” I-PAC said, adding that it would continue its work “unfazed and unperturbed” while respecting the legal process.
Political and Legal Significance
What began as a routine early-morning search on a cold Kolkata morning quickly escalated into a major constitutional and political confrontation. The Supreme Court’s decision on the ED’s request may affect the powers of central agencies and the conduct of state authorities during federal investigations, and it could also set limits on the political executive’s involvement in the investigation process.
The matter has now reached the intersection of criminal law, federalism, and high-stakes politics, with both parties preparing for a long legal battle.