Breaking news:
Adobe Employee Dies After Alleged Assault by In-Laws Following Dispute With Wife | Neeraj Chopra Records Season-Best Throw at Lausanne Diamond League Ahead of Asian Games | IndiGo Aircraft Hits Tail During Landing at Gorakhpur Airport, Grounded for Inspection | Andhra MP's Son Tests Negative for Alcohol in Aston Martin Crash, Escapes Arrest
Logo

Calcutta High Court Throws Out ED-TMC Cross Petitions Over I-PAC Raids, Supreme Court to Take Up Matter

The Calcutta High Court has declined to hear rival pleas filed by the Enforcement Directorate and the Trinamool Congress over the I-PAC raids, clearing the way for the dispute to be argued before the Supreme Court 

14-01-2026
image
   

The legal standoff between the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and West Bengal’s ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) over searches linked to political consultancy firm I-PAC has shifted to the Supreme Court after the Calcutta High Court dismissed petitions from both sides on Monday.

The central agency and the ruling party had approached the High Court with competing claims following ED raids at locations associated with I-PAC, which advises the Trinamool Congress on electoral strategy. With both pleas rejected, the ED’s petition filed in the Supreme Court is now scheduled for hearing on Tuesday.

The ED has alleged that Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee removed electronic devices and documents, including a laptop and a mobile phone, from the residence of I-PAC chief Pratik Jain and the firm’s office premises during the searches. According to the agency, these actions interfered with its investigation.

The Trinamool Congress, however, contested the ED’s version and accused the agency of unlawfully seizing sensitive political material related to the party’s campaign planning and ideological work. The ED has firmly denied taking any such data.

During arguments before Justice Suvra Ghosh, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for the TMC, accused the ED of intimidation and overreach, alleging that party-related data had been improperly accessed. ED counsel S.V. Raju countered the claims, urging restraint and stating that the matter was already before the apex court.

Raju sought adjournment of the High Court proceedings, arguing that judicial propriety required the Supreme Court to hear the case first. He maintained that no immediate harm would result from waiting for the top court’s decision.

The ED had moved the Supreme Court on January 10, a day after the High Court postponed hearings in the case. In its plea, the agency described the episode as a direct confrontation with the state administration and requested a court-monitored CBI probe against the Chief Minister and senior police officials. It has also sought the quashing of multiple FIRs filed by the state police against ED officers.

Reacting to the High Court’s decision, the BJP described it as a setback for the Mamata Banerjee government, claiming it underscored alleged links between the ruling party and private entities. The Trinamool Congress has dismissed such accusations, insisting the matter concerns political privacy and institutional overreach.

Image

Supreme Court Orders Refund of ₹5 Crore Fine to Art of Living in Yamuna Flo

The Supreme Court has granted major relief to the Art of Living Foundation, directing the Delhi Deve

Read More
Image

Polygamy Back in Supreme Court Spotlight: Centre Asked to Respond as Petition

Nearly a decade after the Supreme Court struck down instant triple talaq, the constitutional validit

Read More
Image

Jairam Ramesh Flags Labour-Law Fallout Of Supreme Court’s ‘Industry’ Ru

Congress leader says 5:4 Supreme Court majority has introduced a new “commercial character” elem

Read More