Click the Play button to listen to article

The Supreme Court today(August 18) expressed its intention to transfer the investigation into former West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee's alleged obstruction of the Enforcement Directorate's raid of I-PAC, the political consultant of the All India Trinamool Congress, in January this year, to the Central Bureau of Investigation.

The Court was hearing the writ petition filed by the ED and its officers seeking FIR and investigation against Mamata Banerjee and certain police officials who allegedly abetted her act.

A bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice NV Anjaria was hearing the matter. At the outset, Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy(for the former Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee) submitted that since there has been a change of government, the State police can investigate.

At this, Justice Mishra said that pursuant to the subsequent changes, nothing remains and the matter can be disposed of. He stated that the Court will allow the petitioner's prayer for the transfer of investigation to the CBI. "You can refer to CBI, we will enable you," Justice Mishra said. He then started dictating the order; however, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing through VC, interjected and urged that they want to press their prayers that the larger issue must be decided. 

He said: "We don't want to face any allegations that State Government, because of political reasons, has done it. Either we are right or wrong, I want mylords to decide. I don't wish to fall in the death trap that, subsequent to the changes in the government, the State transferred it to the CBI." 

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju stated that the Court must decide as to whether CBI can investigate a sitting Chief Minister if she goes and commits a crime. "Therefore, the issue is this, if a sitting Chief Minister, who happens to be the Home Minister, if she commits a crime, is it an appropriate case for the CBI to investigate or not?"

The bench then said that it was reserving the matter for orders.

However, Guruswamy responded that arguments till now were only made on maintainability on the writ petition filed by the ED, and the merits were not addressed.

Refuting Guruswamy, SG Mehta said that arguments were made both on merits as well as maintainability. He added that the former CM has anyway admitted that she went to the IPAC headquarters, to which the Court said that this issue will be decided during investigation.

Cross arguments were made by both parties, and the Court itself stated that "nothing remains" on merit and warned Guruswamy that if she wants to continue on merits, it may invite adverse orders from the Court. He said: "There is nothing on merits; if you argue on merits, whatever materials you call it merits, then there will be difficulty for you. If we decide if it's maintainable, we will refer to the CBI...The moment you want us to decide on merits, we will record something which will harm you. I am telling you, be ready for it."

Guruswamy urged the Court to first decide on maintainability, but the Court said it will decide simultaneously. "We don't want to repeat the hearings once again after deciding on maintainability, then second round of hearing. You conclude on merits. Whatever you thing is the merit, you can't compel us to first decide on maintainability and then merits. Its our call," Justice Mishra said.

Nevertheless, Guruswamy argued on merits. She referred to a few judgments, including Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P(2007), that the law is clear that if the police fail to register an FIR or conduct a proper investigation, the aggrieved person must approach the judicial magistrate under Section 156(3) of CrPC.

Guruswamy, who argued for the rest of the afternoon session, informed the bench that Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Shyam Divan will also address the Court on the issues.

The hearing will continue on September 2.

Case Detail: DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANR. v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. | W.P.(Crl.) No. 16/2026

Tags: