The Supreme Court on Thursday, October 29, reserved its order on a plea by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) and its officers seeking an FIR and an investigation against former West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and certain police officials over the alleged obstruction of an ED search at the Kolkata office of political consultancy firm I-PAC, which works with the Trinamool Congress.
A bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice NV Anjaria concluded the hearing and reserved its decision on the limited question of whether the investigation should be referred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or left to the newly appointed West Bengal government.
The petition stems from an incident in which ED officials were conducting searches at I-PAC's office in connection with a coal scam-related money laundering investigation. The agency has alleged that Banerjee arrived at the premises with senior Trinamool Congress leaders and confronted the officials during the operation. It has further claimed that she took away certain files from the premises, thereby obstructing the investigation.
Sibal says state can investigate without Supreme Court intervention
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Banerjee, argued that the state government could investigate the allegations and that no specific Supreme Court order was required.
Pointing out that Banerjee was no longer the chief minister and that the state government was now controlled by a different political party, Sibal said there was no impediment to the authorities referring the matter to the CBI if they considered it necessary.
"Now Mamata Banerjee is not the Chief Minister, so there is no impediment. Now the State government is in the hands of another political party. They are entitled to send any matter to the CBI. Nobody can stand in the way. Why should your lordship pass orders?" Sibal submitted.
Justice Mishra referred to a similar argument made by Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy during the previous hearing. The judge observed that the concern on the other side was that the state government could be accused of acting with political motives.
Sibal responded by stating that he was assuring the court that no such conduct would occur.
ED raises concerns over alleged conflict of interest
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the ED, argued that leaving the matter to the state government could invite allegations of mala fide, or bad faith, if the investigation were referred to the CBI.
He also pointed out that senior police officials had been named as accused persons in the matter and could potentially influence the investigation.
The ED has sought an FIR and an investigation into the alleged obstruction of its search operation, contending that the events at the I-PAC office interfered with its investigation into suspected money laundering linked to a coal scam.
The Supreme Court has reserved its order specifically on whether the matter should be entrusted to the CBI or investigated by the state government. The order is awaited.