Stays FIR, orders CCTV footage to be preserved
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notices to West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and other officials, including the state DGP, the Kolkata Police Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner, on the Enforcement Directorate’s plea alleging forceful interference and obstruction of its searches at the premises of I-PAC, by the CM and state officials.
“Issue notice to the respondents. Counter affidavit be filed within two weeks. Post the matter on February 3, 2026. In the meanwhile it is directed that, the respondents (West Bengal government) shall preserve the CCTV cameras at I-PAC and other cameras containing the footage of nearby areas,” a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi said, as per news agency ANI.
The Supreme Court, in its order, also stayed the FIR filed by the West Bengal police against ED officials, who had carried out searches at the office of the I-PAC and its co-founder, until the next hearing in the case.
The bench also took note of the writ petitions filed by the ED and its Deputy Director, and ED officers who had visited the concerned premises.
The court further noted the submissions of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who had alleged that the West Bengal Chief Minister had allegedly interfered in investigations earlier as well, and gave an example of a case being probed by the CBI. Mehta alleged a pattern of interference whenever investigations are conducted by central agencies.
The court also noted the submissions of the Solicitor General as well as the Additional Solicitor General that since the CM and DGP were allegedly involved, it would be unrealistic to expect a fair investigation by the police under their control, and which is why the probe should be transferred to the CBI.
The court further directed that the CCTV footage of the premises searched on January 8 be preserved and protected.
Earlier, as the hearing began on the Enforcement Directorate plea seeking the suspension of West Bengal DGP Rajeev Kumar in the I-PAC raids matter, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court that developments in the case pointed to a disturbing pattern wherein Chief Minister Banerjee allegedly intervenes and obstructs the discharge of lawful duties by statutory authorities.
The Chief Minister arrives at the spot along with the Commissioner of Police and even stages a dharna, Mehta said in the court.
The Solicitor General submitted before the Supreme Court that there was material on record to indicate the presence of incriminating evidence at the raids’ site and the local police was informed about it. However, the Director General of Police, the Chief Minister, the Commissioner of Police and the area DCP, accompanied by a large police contingent, arrived at the spot and removed the material without authorisation, the Solicitor General alleged.
The mobile phone of an ED official was also taken away, Mehta added, as per news agency ANI.
The Solicitor General further claimed that the CM’s action to go before the media during the raids would discourage officers from discharging their duties.
Mehta requested the court to take cognisance of the developments and sought the immediate suspension of Bengal officers present during the ED searches. He also demanded a departmental enquiry against these officers.
The ED, in its complaint, has alleged that CM Mamata Banerjee took away all digital devices and three incriminating documents from the location of searches. The ED submitted before the court that the CM left the spot at around 12:15 pm after which an incident report was prepared.
The court was further informed that the documents in question were shown to the DGP and the Police Commissioner, but the incriminating material was still taken away and later publicly displayed. The ED pointed out that I-PAC has not lodged a single complaint in the matter despite all these events.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the Chairman of the Trinamool Congress, sought time from the apex court to make his submissions and added that the Calcutta High Court should first hear the matter and deliver its judgment.
I-PAC had a large amount of party data, and when the ED went to carry out searches, it knew that sensitive party information would be present, Sibal told the court.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the State of West Bengal and the DGP, argued that the ED’s petition was not maintainable. He further stated that a direct approach to the Supreme Court by the ED was permissible only in exceptional situations where no effective remedy was available.
The senior advocate also objected to “forum shopping” by the agency, pointing out that broadly similar reliefs had already been sought before the Calcutta High Court.
Responding to the Solicitor General’s statement that the local police were informed, Singhvi contended that the State received only a casual email at around 11:30 am, even though the search had begun at 6:45 am.
Earlier, the ED, in its fresh plea filed in the Supreme Court, had sought the suspension of West Bengal DGP Rajeev Kumar.
The ED also asked for disciplinary action against several senior officials of the West Bengal Police, claiming misconduct and lack of cooperation on their part during the central agency’s investigation.
The ED further requested the top court to issue directions to the Department of Personnel and Training and the Union Ministry of Home Affairs to launch disciplinary proceedings against the officials concerned.
Agencies