ED vs Mamata Banerjee: Supreme Court Defers Hearing On Alleged Interference In I-PAC Raid Case
The Court deferred the hearing until August 18 after indicating that the matter would be taken up after the partial working days period
Supreme Court adjourned ED’s plea against Mamata Banerjee and West Bengal officials over alleged interference in the I-PAC probe and Kolkata searches
The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned the hearing in the Enforcement Directorate’s writ petition against former Mamata Banerjee and other West Bengal officials over alleged interference in the agency’s investigation and searches at the Kolkata offices of political consultancy firm Indian Political Action Committee and its co-founder Pratik Jain.
The Bench of Justice PK Mishra and N.V. Anjaria said the matter would now be taken up after the Court’s partial working days and posted the case for hearing on August 18.
The proceedings, however, witnessed a lighter exchange between the Bench and senior counsel appearing in the matter.
When the case was called out, Justice Mishra asked Senior Advocate Kalyan Banerjee, “Mr. Kalyan Banerjee where are you?”
Banerjee responded that he was appearing virtually in view of directions issued by the Chief Justice regarding virtual hearings on Mondays and Fridays. “I am here virtually. The Hon’ble Chief Justice directed Monday and Friday will be in virtual, that’s why I’m in virtual,” he said.
Justice Mishra, in a lighter vein, remarked that physical appearances had now also been permitted. “He has permitted physically also now. Only for you the circular was changed. Now you have to appear personally,” the judge quipped.
The Bench then posted the matter for August 18.
“Let us have it on 18th August, Tuesday,” the Court said.
Banerjee replied humorously, “I am missing the interaction with your lordships.”
Justice Mishra responded, “Yes, we are also missing. Kalyan Bandopadhyay appearing physically is different.”
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju joined the exchange, remarking, “When he appears from the other side there’s more weight.”
Justice Mishra continued the banter, saying, “Yes there’s always more weight.”
Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, who was also present during the hearing, declined to enter the conversation, saying, “I am not commenting on that.”
The ED’s petition concerns allegations that West Bengal officials interfered with the agency’s probe and searches conducted at I-PAC’s Kolkata office in connection with an ongoing investigation.
Last month, SG Mehta told the bench that "The sitting Chief Minister has actively caused obstruction in investigation...Rule of Law ceases to operate when executive uses state machinery to obstruct investigation."
Court was hearing the plea filed by ED against the West Bengal Chief Minister and certain state police officers over their obstruction of a search at the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC. Recently, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra had told court that ED must justify how it has been weaponized in the state. In a sharp response, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju had said, "It has not been weaponized, it has been terrorized..".
In a complete reversal of her stance, Mamata Banerjee had told the Court that ED allowed her to retrieve devices and physical files during its search at the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC, which works with the All India Trinamool Congress.
On January 15, the court had issued notice on petitions filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and its officers alleging interference by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and senior state police officials during a search conducted at the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC and the residence of its director Prateek Jain.
Case Title: Directorate of Enforcement v. The State of West Bengal
Bench: Justices PK Mishra and NV Anjaria
Hearing Date: May 22, 2026