ED says no paper seized from TMC poll adviser

The Calcutta high court on Wednesday disposed of the Trinamool Congress’s petition accusing the Enforcement Directorate of seizing sensitive poll data after the federal agency said nothing was seized during the January 8 search at strategy firm I-PAC that sparked a political storm.

The single bench of justice Suvra Ghosh also adjourned hearings on ED’s petition, accusing chief minister Mamata Banerjee of storming ED’s search operations and taking away documents and a laptop, as the agency’s twin petitions are before the Supreme Court.

A top court bench of justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi will hear the agency’s plea on Thursday. ED has sought a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe against Mamata Banerjee, the state’s director general of police and the Kolkata police commissioner, accusing them of obstructing a lawful money laundering probe, forcibly snatching digital devices and documents, and wrongfully confining ED officers during the search operations.

Justice Ghosh held the hearing behind closed doors and allowed live streaming but nobody unrelated to either of the petitions was let in in view of the ruckus a crowd of lawyers created during the first scheduled hearing on January 9.

Representing ED over video conference, additional solicitor general SV Raju told the court that TMC’s petition was “not maintainable” because it was filed by a person named Suvashis Chakraborty who was neither present during the search operations nor mentioned any source of first-hand information.

Challenging Raju’s argument, TMC’s counsel Menaka Guruswamy said I-PAC was authorised by the Trinamool Congress to work as its election strategist and Chakraborty was authorised by the party to file the petition.

“Raju showed the court two punchnamas (seizure lists) showing nothing had been seized by ED. The judge took cognisance of this and disposed of the TMC’s petition,” TMC Lok Sabha member and lawyer Kalyan Banerjee, who represented Mamata Banerjee in her capacity as the party chairperson, told reporters after the hearing.

Raising his second objection, Raju requested the court to record his statement to the effect that nothing was seized by ED and it was the chief minister who seized the documents and electronic devices.

The court accepted Raju’s appeal. Guruswamy, too, told the court that TMC would accept Raju’s statement on record.

According to lawyers who attended the meeting, Raju raised objections whenever Kalyan Banerjee tried to speak, saying the chief minister should first be made a party in the case as she took away sensitive documents mentioned in the TMC’s petition.

Last Thursday, ED searches at the offices of political strategy firm I-PAC in Kolkata and the residence of its director, Pratik Jain, turned into a pitched political battle. Even as the searches were on, Mamata Banerjee stormed into Jain’s residence, and took away documents and a laptop, accusing ED of seizing her party’s internal documents and sensitive data relating to the 2026 assembly polls, including the candidate list. The agency accused the TMC chief of interfering in the ED’s action and taking away evidence.

ED’s money laundering probe in the matter was based on a CBI First Information Report (FIR) registered in November 2020 on allegations that coal was being illegally mined at Eastern Coalfields Ltd‘s mines in Kunustoria and Kajora in West Bengal. The agency previously questioned TMC general secretary Abhishek Banerjee, alleging that he is a beneficiary of funds obtained in the illegal mining.

In Kolkata, the state police filed a suo motu case against ED and a separate case - based on Mamata Banerjee’s e-mail complaint - under Sections 3 (5) (common intention) , 303 (2) (theft) and 332 (3) (trespassing to commit crime) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act (computer related offence). A similar case was registered by the Salt Lake Electronic Complex police station.

In its writ petition before the Supreme Court, ED invoked Articles 14, 21 and 22 of the Constitution, seeking protection for its officers from what it described as “malicious criminal prosecution” and intimidation by the West Bengal government, and urged the court to order an independent CBI investigation into the incident.

The agency alleged that the “highest constitutional functionary of the state”, accompanied by the chief secretary, DGP, Kolkata police commissioner and nearly 100 police personnel, barged into search premises on January 8 where ED officers were conducting operations under Section 17 of the PMLA at the residence of I-PAC director Pratik Jain and at the office of Indian PAC Consulting Pvt Ltd.

According to ED, its officers were threatened, restrained and prevented from completing the search, while “a trunk load of files” and electronic devices, including laptops and mobile phones that were in the process of forensic extraction, were forcibly taken away. The petition alleges that ED officers were wrongfully confined and that even the mandatory panchnama (record of event) proceedings were compromised due to intimidation.

Terming the incident “shocking” and “unprecedented,” ED said the actions amounted to a series of grave cognisable offences under Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), including theft, robbery, dacoity, house trespass, criminal intimidation, wrongful restraint and destruction of evidence. It urged the Supreme Court to direct CBI to register FIRs against Mamata Banerjee and senior police officials, contending that approaching the state police would be futile as the accused themselves control the police machinery.