The legal tug-of-war between West Bengal’s ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) over the I-PAC raids has now moved to the Supreme Court, after the Calcutta High Court dismissed petitions filed by both sides on Wednesday.
The case relates to recent ED raids at the offices and residence of Pratik Jain, head of political consultancy firm I-PAC, which works with the Trinamool Congress. The central agency had approached the High Court alleging that Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee walked out with a laptop, mobile phone and several documents during the raid. According to the ED, this happened in the presence of senior state officials.
In response, the Trinamool Congress filed a counter-petition, accusing the ED of unlawfully seizing sensitive political material, including documents related to the party’s strategy and ideology. The ED has denied these allegations.
During the hearing, TMC counsel Menaka Guruswamy accused the ED of “bullying” and argued that the search amounted to an attack on political data and ideology. She urged the court to ensure that the party’s data is protected and returned. ED counsel S V Raju rejected these claims, stating there was “no need for drama” and argued that the matter should be heard first by the Supreme Court, as judicial decorum demands.
Accepting this position, the Calcutta High Court dismissed both petitions, effectively clearing the way for the Supreme Court to take up the matter. The ED has already filed a petition before the top court, which is scheduled to hear the case on Thursday.
In its Supreme Court plea, the ED has described the episode as a “showdown” triggered by the Bengal government’s actions. The agency has sought a CBI investigation against Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, the Kolkata Police Commissioner and another senior police officer. It has also requested that four FIRs filed by the state police against ED officials, alleging theft, trespassing and criminal intimidation, be quashed.
With the High Court stepping aside, all eyes are now on the Supreme Court’s next move in this politically sensitive case.
