I-PAC raids case: Supreme Court to decide if ED is ‘weaponised’ or ‘terrorised’

The West Bengal government in the Supreme Court on Wednesday (February 18, 2026) said the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) is being “weaponised” by the Centre to tackle down political rivals in Opposition-ruled States while the Central agency retorted that it is actually being “terrorised” by the Mamata Banerjee government.

The brief exchange came during a hearing on a petition filed by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the alleged obstruction of its raids at the offices of political consultancy firm I-PAC by Ms. Banerjee herself and senior police officers who accompanied her.

“The ED has been weaponised,” senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, for the State government, also represented by senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, remarked.

“We are being terrorised,” Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, for ED, responded.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the Central agency, said a rejoinder would be filed in the course of the day.

A Bench of Justices P.K. Mishra and K.V. Viswanathan scheduled the case for hearing on March 18 on issues, including the maintainability of ED approaching the apex court when a similar case was pending before the Calcutta High Court urging identical grounds of challenge.

Editorial: On the ED raids in West Bengal

On January 15, the apex court had stayed the Kolkata Police probe against ED officials who conducted searches at I-PAC office and the residence of its co-founder Pratik Jain on January 8.

The State police investigation had been based on allegations that sensitive election records of the State’s ruling Trinamool Congress party, which consults I-PAC on electoral and political strategy, were “stolen” by the Central agency officials during the raids.

The complaints were lodged against the ED at Shakespeare Sarani Police Station and Bidhannagar Electronic Complex Police Station. 

Filing its response to the ED petition, the State government had said there cannot be “parallel proceedings” before the High Court and the Supreme Court. It said the central agency did not have fundamental rights to file a writ petition before the apex court. The State had argued that the ED did not have the power to conduct “omnibus search and seizure” and that the agency had violated privileged communications.

The ED has sought a CBI probe against State and police personnel for obstructing raids which were part of an investigation into a ₹2,742-crore coal smuggling case.

The Bench had previously said the case raises “serious” issues relating to the scope of the investigations carried out by Central agencies like the ED and interference by State agencies.

“According to us, for the adherence to rule of law in the country and to ensure that each organ functions independently, it is necessary to examine this issue so that offenders are not allowed to be protected under the shield of law enforcement agencies of a particular State… There are larger questions involved here. If they are left undecided, the situation may become worse and a situation of lawlessness may prevail in one or the other State, considering that different outfits are governing different States,” the Bench had recorded in the January 15 order.