.webp)
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday approached the Calcutta High Court, alleging unlawful interference and obstruction during its search operations carried out in West Bengal earlier in the day.
The central agency has moved the court claiming that its investigation was impeded during the raids conducted on Thursday. The matter is listed for hearing before Justice Suvra Ghosh on Friday.
Earlier, the ED carried out search operations at the Kolkata office of political consultancy firm I-PAC and at the residence of its director Pratik Jain. Searches were conducted at around 10 locations, including four premises in Delhi, beginning at approximately 7 am, with central paramilitary forces deployed during the operation.
Sources said that the I-PAC office located in Salt Lake and Jain’s residence on Loudon Street were among the premises covered during the searches.
The ED has alleged that its proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) were obstructed.
“The CM’s convoy then proceeded to I-PAC’s office premises, from where Ms. Banerjee, her aides, and the state police personnel forcibly removed physical documents and electronic evidences. The actions have resulted in obstruction in ongoing investigation and proceedings under the PMLA,” the ED said.
The statement came after, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee arrived at Jain’s residence and alleged that the agency was attempting to seize Trinamool Congress (TMC) internal documents, hard disks and sensitive data related to the party’s electoral planning. She termed the searches at the residence and offices of Jain, whom she described as “the in-charge of my IT cell,” as politically motivated and unconstitutional.
Detailing the basis for the searches, the agency stated, “the searches were part of an evidence-driven probe into illegal coal smuggling and were not aimed at any political entity. The agency said operations were underway at a total of 10 locations, including premises in West Bengal and Delhi.”
The agency also alleged that its personnel faced interference during the searches, claiming that individuals holding constitutional positions entered two of the premises and forcibly removed documents, allegedly misusing their authority.
