SC Halts West Bengal Police FIRs Against ED In I-PAC Raid Dispute; Issues Notice To Mamata

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday stepped into a bitter legal battle between the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the West Bengal government. 

What did the Supreme Court decide?

The top court has stayed the FIRs lodged by West Bengal Police against ED officials linked to raids at political consultancy I-PAC’s offices. It also issued a notice to Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and senior state officials, asking them to reply within two weeks to the ED’s allegations. 

“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," the bench said.

The bench, led by Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi, also directed that CCTV footage from the I-PAC site and surrounding areas be preserved while the matter is pending. 

Why is the Supreme Court hearing this case?

The dispute stems from raids carried out by the ED on January 8 at I-PAC's Salt Lake office in Kolkata and at the home of its director, Pratik Jain, in connection with a central probe. 

The ED had filed a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution asking the Supreme Court to intervene. It urged the court to direct the Home Ministry, the Department of Personnel & Training, and the West Bengal government to suspend senior police officials who, the ED claims, failed to support its lawful actions.

What did ED say?

The Enforcement Directorate claims that state authorities, including the Chief Minister, obstructed the searches and took away electronic devices and documents that were crucial to the investigation. 

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, accused Mamata of "barging in and interfered", "whenever statutory authorities exercised statutory power."

"It reflects a very shocking pattern emerging. In past also, whenever statutory authorities exercised statutory power, CM barges into premises."

The agency claims its officers were obstructed, intimidated, and even had documents and devices taken away during the course of the operation.

“Director, Commissioner accompanied her. They were accomplices. Officers sat on dharna with political leaders. One officer is personally aggrieved... Joint Director, CBI's house was gheraoed...stones were pelted,” said SG Mehta.

During Thursday’s hearing, the Supreme Court described these claims as “very serious” and said it would look into whether interference by state officials in a central investigation could set a dangerous precedent. 

The court also noted its concern about reported chaos in the Calcutta High Court during earlier proceedings on the matter. 

What are the main claims from each side?

The Enforcement Directorate alleges that Mamata Banerjee and top state police officers intervened during the search, removed key materials and prevented the probe from progressing. The ED’s lawyer told the Supreme Court that this kind of interference could discourage central agencies from carrying out lawful investigations. 

The West Bengal government, represented by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, has rejected these accusations. They argue that the High Court should have had the first say on disputes arising from the raids and that approaching the Supreme Court directly was inappropriate. They also say the ED’s claims are exaggerated and politically motivated.

What happens next?

The Supreme Court has set the matter for further hearing on February 3 after receiving responses from the state government and the Chief Minister’s office. The stay on the FIRs means that West Bengal Police cannot proceed with their criminal investigations against ED officials until the court rules further.