The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notices to Mamata Banerjee and the Bengal and Calcutta police chiefs on the Enforcement Directorate’s petition alleging obstruction of its raids, observing that “lawlessness” would prevail if it did not intervene.

It acknowledged that a central agency couldn’t interfere with a party’s election work but asked whether this could be used as a pretext if the alleged offences and the investigation were genuine.

The court stayed the FIRs registered in Bengal against ED officials involved in the January 8 raids on two Calcutta premises of I-PAC, the poll consultancy that handles the Trinamool Congress’s data and strategy.

“We are of the prima facie opinion that the present petition has raised a serious issue... on the investigation by the ED or other Central agencies and its interference by State agencies,” the bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi said, dictating the order in open court.

“According to us, for the sustenance of rule of law in the country and to allow each organ to function independently, it is necessary for this court to examine the issue so that the offenders are not allowed to be protected under the shield of the law enforcement agencies of a particular state.

“The present issue involves larger questions which, if allowed to remain undecided, would further worsen the situation and there would arise a situation of lawlessness prevailing in other states also....

“It is also true that any Central agency does not have the power to interfere with the election work of any party. But... if the central agency is bona fide investigating any alleged serious offences, the question arises whether in the guise of taking shield of party activities, Central agencies can be restricted from exercising their statutory duties.”

Mamata had entered both I-PAC premises, accompanied by top police officers and bureaucrats, and carried away “sensitive” election-related documents that she alleged the central agency wanted to hand over to the BJP in the run-up to the Bengal polls.

The ED says the raids were apolitical, related to a coal theft racket.

The apex court directed the Bengal government to ensure the preservation of CCTV footage of the premises searched on January 8.

It gave the chief minister and the police officers two weeks to file their responses to the ED plea, which has sought a CBI probe and the registration of FIRs against the accused for “theft”, “robbery”, “dacoity”, “attempt to murder” and “trespass”.

Apart from Mamata, the ED has sought the registration of FIRs against Bengal director-general of police Rajeev Kumar, Calcutta police commissioner Manoj Kumar Verma, and deputy commissioner (South) Priyabrata Roy.

The official order had not been uploaded till late evening.

Solicitor-general Tushar Mehta and additional solicitor-general S.V. Raju appeared for the ED while senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi represented the Bengal government.

‘Shocking pattern’

Mehta kicked off the arguments saying the issue mirrored “a very shocking pattern”. He underlined the chief minister had earlier, too, interfered with a CBI investigation against DGP Kumar — who was then Calcutta police commissioner — by sitting on a public dharna.

At that time, Mehta said, CBI officers were surrounded and pelted with stones; this time, the state police had seized materials collected by ED officials, he alleged.

“She (Mamata) takes it away. Mobile phones of the ED officials are also taken away. She even went before the media. Such kind of conduct by the state chief minister will only encourage officers to not discharge their duty,” Mehta said.

“Forces will be demoralised. Let (an) example be set. Officers who were present during exercise be placed under suspension and placed under departmental inquiry.”

“You want us to suspend?” Justice Mishra asked, to which Mehta said the competent authority should be directed to suspend the officials.

He accused ruling party members of crating a ruckus at Calcutta High Court on January 9, preventing the hearing of an ED petition. He claimed WhatsApp chats showed that the Trinamool legal cell had instructed party cadre to come to the court.

“So, it is like saying, ‘Come everyone’, as if it is Jantar Mantar,” Justice Mishra observed, referring to a popular protest site in Delhi.

Mehta said that during Wednesday’s hearing, the high court chief justice had passed an order saying no one apart from the lawyers appearing in the matter would be allowed.

However, the hearing was not satisfactory, he said, with the ED facing various difficulties and Raju’s mike being muted frequently.

“But that (mike) is in the control of the court?” Justice Mishra observed.

Panchnama defence

Sibal and Singhvi questioned the maintainability of the ED’s petition and said the matter should ideally be left to the high court.

“Elections in West Bengal are conducted by I-PAC or Election Commission?” the bench asked Sibal.

Sibal said I-PAC possessed a huge volume of Trinamool data.

“When they (ED) went there, they knew a lot of party data would be available. Why was there a need to go there in the midst of an election?” Sibal said.

“The last statement in the coal scam was recorded on 24.02.2024. What have they been doing since then? Why so keen now in the midst of elections? If you get hold of the information, how will we fight the elections?”

He added: “(The Trinamool) chairman (Mamata) had the right to go (to the raid sites). Lies will be demonstrated if we show the video.”

Sibal said the allegation that the chief minister had taken away all the devices was a lie. “It is substantiated by their own panchnama; this is just to create prejudice,” he argued.

He said the laptop of I-PAC director Pratik Jain – whose home was raided -- would have contained poll-related information.

“She (Mamata) took the laptop and the personal iPhone. That’s all. There was no obstruction. This is signed by ED,” Sibal argued.

“(The) averment of the petition is contrary to the panchnama. I-PAC has party material, which is why ED went there. Completely mala fide act by ED to gather as much material as they can.”