The Mamata Banerjee-Enforcement Directorate rigmarole here on Thursday united the Bengal Opposition in her criticism even as the BJP’s state unit seemed unprepared and shocked, and Left and the Congress were outraged by not only her actions but also the possibility of a “setting” between her and the BJP’s highest leadership.

The chief minister interrupted the ED searches at the Salt Lake office of political consultancy firm I-PAC and the Loudon Street residence of its director Pratik Jain, alleging that the central agency was trying to seize sensitive Trinamool Congress data ahead of the crucial Assemby polls. She also “brought back” physical and digital data, asserting they were sensitive information about her party and had no link with any
financial probe.

Outplayed by Mamata’s alacrity despite her legally flawed move, the BJP termed her intervention as “criminal offence” that brought shame to Bengal. The CPM saw in the day’s episode a “staged drama”, and the Congress state unit accused her and the BJP’s top brass in Delhi of a “setting”.

The Bengal unit of the BJP, which initially watched developments unfold, issued a formal statement rejecting her allegations.

“No office of any political party has been searched,” the BJP statement read, adding that “the agency has also stated that the searches have no linkage with any election and are part of its routine and continuing crackdown on money laundering”.

“Law enforcement agencies must be allowed to function independently, professionally and without political interference. The law must be permitted to take its own course, guided solely by facts and evidence. Any attempt to politicise lawful investigative processes or to undermine constitutional authorities only weakens public trust in institutions and the rule of law,” it added.

In the evening, Bengal BJP president Samik Bhattacharya described her actions as a “criminal offence,” saying: “Bengal lost its face today. The entire country witnessed her role. The custodians of the Constitution should think about it.”

Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari said the ED should have anticipated such an intervention, given her past conduct. “The ED should use its constitutional powers and take legal action against her,” he said.

The CPM condemned Mamata’s conduct while simultaneously questioning the central agencies. “After her role in preventing the raid at Rajeev Kumar’s residence a few years ago, the ED should have taken more precautions. How was she allowed to enter the sites today (Thursday)?” state CPM secretary Md Salim asked.

“Mamata Banerjee has crossed all limits of shamelessness,” Salim said, demanding immediate legal prosecution not only against her but also senior cops who accompanied her.

He questioned why she rushed to I-PAC chief Jain’s premises, claiming that the I-PAC office was effectively owned by Trinamool national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee under a different name.

“How important was Pratik Jain that it compelled her to rush there? It appears that a drama is being enacted between the central agencies and Mamata Banerjee,”
Salim said.

He alleged that information about the raid was leaked in advance. “In the past, before reaching Rajeev Kumar’s house, the ED informed the chief minister, the media and the Kolkata Police through WhatsApp. The same thing happened today. A section of ED officials might be involved. The fish rots from the head,” Salim said.

State Congress president Subhankar Sarkar said: “What Mamata Banerjee has done today by interrupting a raid and taking away documents is a gross misuse of her constitutional position. However, this is part of a larger deal between the BJP and Trinamool, which is why no action will be taken against her.”

Political scientist Biswanath Chakraborty said: “From a legal point of view, her role may be flawed, but politically she has conveyed a message to the BJP. She projected defiance against a central agency under a BJP-led government. Unless there is legal recourse against her, this may work to Trinamool’s advantage.”

He said the more serious issue was the alleged removal of documents. “She claimed to have taken the candidates’ list, but what if there were money laundering-related documents?” he asked.