New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the FIRs registered by West Bengal police against Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials, warning that alleged state interference in central investigations could trigger national "lawlessness" if left unchecked.

The order, delivered by a Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi, follows a high-stakes legal confrontation sparked by the ED's Jan. 8 raid on the Kolkata offices of I-PAC, a political consultancy firm linked to the Trinamool Congress (TMC).

The apex court issued notices to West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, Director General of Police Rajeev Kumar, and other senior officials, seeking their responses by Feb. 3.

"Larger Questions" of Law and Order

In a pointed observation, the Bench remarked that the standoff raised "serious and far-reaching questions" about the independence of federal agencies.

"According to us, larger questions are involved... which if allowed to remain undecided, would further worsen the situation, and there will be a situation of lawlessness prevailing in one or the other state, considering that different outfits are governing at different places," the Court stated.

While clarifying that central agencies have no right to obstruct legitimate election work, the Bench questioned whether "bona fide investigations into serious offences" could be blocked by using political activity as a "shield."

The I-PAC Confrontation

The legal battle stems from a search operation linked to a ₹2,742 crore coal-pilferage scam. The ED has accused Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee of "barging in" to the residence of I-PAC director Pratik Jain during the raid to forcibly remove "key evidence," including a laptop and a green folder.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, characterised the incident as "theft" and "mobocracy," alleging that the Chief Minister arrived with a massive police contingent to intimidate federal officers. He further claimed an ED officer's mobile phone was seized and that such actions were part of a "disturbing pattern" of state-sponsored obstruction.

Defence and Maintainability

Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Banerjee and the State, vigorously contested the petitions.

  • Sensitive Data: Sibal argued that I-PAC held sensitive Trinamool Congress election strategies and that the ED’s timing, amidst an election season, was a deliberate attempt to compromise the party’s confidential data.
  • Panchnama Discrepancy: Singhvi alleged "forum shopping" by the ED and argued that the agency's own search record (panchnama) contradicted the claims of theft, stating, "Either the panchnama is lying, or the ED petition is lying."
  • Z+ Security: The State argued that the DGP was legally obligated to accompany the Chief Minister due to her Z+ security status.

Preserving Evidence

Beyond staying the police investigation into the ED officers, the Supreme Court directed the West Bengal government to preserve all CCTV footage and storage devices from the I-PAC premises and surrounding areas.

The stay on the FIRs will remain in effect until the next scheduled hearing on Feb. 3, 2026.

With inputs from ANI