The Supreme Court on Thursday, 29 October reserved its order on a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe and registration of an FIR against former West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and senior police officials. The case stems from alleged interference during ED search operations at the Kolkata office of political consultancy firm Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC).

What the Court Heard

A Bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N.V. Anjaria confined its deliberations to a narrow question: whether the matter should be referred to the CBI by judicial direction, or whether the newly elected West Bengal government should be left to decide on its own. The Bench observed that the circumstances under which the ED had originally approached the top court may no longer exist, given the change of government in the state.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Banerjee, argued that with a new government in place in West Bengal, there was no longer any obstacle to the state itself deciding to transfer the probe to the CBI. He maintained that a court direction was unnecessary, as the state government was fully competent to refer the matter to the central agency independently.

ED's Counterargument

Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, representing the ED, pushed back firmly. He argued that leaving the decision to the state government risked allegations of mala fide conduct and could compromise the integrity of the investigation. Raju stressed that the case involved allegations against not only a former Chief Minister but also senior police officials — including the then West Bengal Director General of Police Rajeev Kumar and the then Kolkata Police Commissioner Manoj Kumar Verma — making independent oversight essential.

The ED's law officer further submitted that since cross-cases were involved, a single agency should handle both sides of the dispute to ensure a coherent and unbiased inquiry. He said handing the decision back to the state could invite fresh controversy over how the case was managed.

Background: The I-PAC Raid and What Followed

The dispute traces back to 8 January, when ED officials conducted search operations at the I-PAC office in Kolkata and at the residence of its co-founder, Pratik Jain, as part of a money laundering investigation linked to an alleged coal smuggling scam. The ED has claimed that Banerjee arrived at the premises — accompanied by police personnel and senior officials — while the searches were ongoing and allegedly interfered with the probe.

Banerjee has denied these allegations. She has maintained that she visited the premises to retrieve confidential data belonging to the All India Trinamool Congress (TMC), which she said related to the party's electoral strategy.

On 15 January, the Supreme Court stayed FIRs registered by West Bengal Police against ED officials in connection with the same searches, and directed the preservation of CCTV footage and other digital records relating to the premises. Notably, the apex court had earlier orally observed that alleged interference by a sitting Chief Minister in an ongoing investigation could put democracy 'in peril.'

What Happens Next

With the Supreme Court having reserved its order, the ruling — once delivered — will determine whether the CBI takes over the probe by judicial mandate or whether the new West Bengal government retains the discretion to act. Legal observers note that the outcome could set a significant precedent for how courts balance state autonomy with the need for independent investigation in cases implicating senior political figures. All eyes are now on the Bench's written order.