Supreme Court Hearing ED vs I-PAC: Mamata Banerjee had courage to steal docs, then blame ED for theft, says ED
A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi said they intend to issue notice and examine the matter. "This is a very serious matter; we will issue a notice. We have to examine it," it remarked orally.
The Enforcement Directorate told the Supreme Court on Thursday that West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee "had the courage" to take incriminating material, which amounted to theft and then publicly blame the agency.
A war of words broke out during the I-PAC hearing in the Supreme Court with the ED urging it to consider laying down clear guidelines restraining lawyers from speaking to the media about matters in which they are appearing. The ED, through Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, argued that public commentary through press conferences could prejudice ongoing proceedings and undermine the judicial process.
Responding to the submission, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, countered that any such restraint should apply equally to investigating agencies, while asserting that bodies like the CBI and ED "routinely leak selective information to journalists of their choosing".
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, "The ED officials had shown their identity cards. They had the courage to take incriminating material in their custody, which is theft, and then publicly declare they did it? This is not happening for the first time. Please do something that stops once and for all."
The Supreme Court said it was a serious matter and wanted to examine the arguments from both sides.
ED waited for 2 years, raided I-PAC close to polls, Mamata Banerjee tells SC
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee questioned the ED's raids on I-PAC, saying why the agency visited the state after two years and conducted searches just before the impending Assembly polls.
"We are disturbed by what is happening. Why did the ED wait for two years to come to Bengal? This is just to create prejudice. The ED was already there and the Chief Minister came at 12 pm and left at 12:15 pm (on January 8)," said counsel Kapil Sibal, who appeared for CM.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said he did not know what warranted such drastic action, alleging that the sitting Chief Minister entered the premises with the Commissioner of Police, violated law and order, and took possession of digital devices and three incriminating documents before leaving.
He said an incident report was prepared, and the documents were shown to senior officials, including the DGP and police chief. Mehta stressed that the search was conducted under Section 17 of the PMLA, with officers duly identifying themselves, and argued that taking incriminating material into custody amounted to theft, especially when it was later publicly acknowledged.
He told the court that this was not an isolated incident and urged it to intervene to ensure such actions do not recur. During the hearing, Justice PK Mishra questioned why the Enforcement Directorate had gone to the I-PAC premises and what it was investigating. Responding, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the agency was probing a multi-state money-laundering case involving Rs 2,742 crore, in which illegally excavated coal was allegedly sold through a company.
He told the court that the ED conducted searches at I-PAC under Section 17 of the PMLA and that search proceedings were simultaneously carried out at 10 different I-PAC locations.
When Justice Mishra asked whether this was the same I-PAC associated with former election strategist Prashant Kishor, Mehta replied in the affirmative.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court that the Enforcement Directorate is not merely a statutory body but exists to enforce the law and protect victims. “We attach property, take it into possession, and ensure it benefits those affected by offences,” he said.
He explained that in cases like money laundering, recovered funds are returned to the rightful depositors, representing the will of the victims.
Mehta added that a second plea in the case has been filed by an ED officer, noting that three FIRs have been registered against the agency. He alleged that based on one such FIR, officials arrived at the scene and unlawfully removed CCTV footage.
The Enforcement Directorate has sought the suspension of West Bengal police officers involved in the I-PAC raid incident. The Solicitor General emphasised that state forces should not assume they can intervene in operations simply because they are accompanied by the Chief Minister.
The SG claimed the officers even staged a dharna at the site.
When ED officers went to collect incriminating evidence, they informed local police, but Banerjee allegedly interfered, taking away materials, including a mobile phone belonging to an ED officer.
The SG contended this amounted to theft, adding that Banerjee herself had publicly admitted to taking the items.
The top court also said that it was very much disturbed by the commotion at the Calcutta High Court during its hearing in the ED raids case. The Calcutta High Court had adjourned till January 14 the hearing on petitions related to the ED's search and seizure operations at sites linked to political consultancy firm I-PAC, citing unmanageable chaos inside the courtroom.
No comments:
Post a Comment