E-Paper
Grossly distorted: ED on Mamata’s I-PAC raids claims
The ED disputes Mamata Banerjee's claim of retrieving party data, alleging she forcibly removed evidence during a money laundering probe.
New Delhi The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has refuted West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee’s claim that she merely retrieved her party’s confidential data from the I-PAC office on January 8 with the consent of officers of the federal agency , alleging instead that she “forcibly” entered premises being actively searched in connection with a money laundering probe and removed incriminating materials with the assistance of senior state police officials.
In a common affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, ED and its officers contended that Banerjee, accompanied by her Z+ security detail, the state director general of Police, the Kolkata police commissioner and “hundreds” of police personnel, created an atmosphere of coercion and intimidation during the search conducted under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act (PMLA).
The matter came up before a bench led by Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra but was adjourned to March 10.
ED asserted that Banerjee “admittedly entered” premises where an authorised search was underway last month and took possession of documents and digital devices. While she has stated in her counter affidavit that ED officials permitted her to retrieve party-related data, the agency said “nothing can be farther than the truth”.
According to the affidavit, the chief minister entered the premises “in complete disregard of the lawful proceedings that were already underway”, escorted by senior police officials and a large contingent of state police.
“The heavy presence of police personnel to the tune of hundreds itself demonstrates coercion by the state police and interference with lawful search under PMLA,” said the agency, adding that there was “no question of acceding to any request for handing over incriminating digital devices in the middle of taking digital back-ups”. The agency maintained that Banerjee halted a back-up process of a computer and an e-mail dump that was being carried out by ED and took away the computer.
The agency also claimed that its officers were “wrongfully confined” and that the search had to be wound up prematurely to avoid physical confrontation between security agencies. “No investigating agency would ordinarily permit a third person to enter into premises of an ongoing search and take away materials,” stated the affidavit, insisting that CCTV and body-cam footage would demonstrate that devices and documents were removed by use of force and intimidation.
Terming the incident a “serious infraction of law”, ED said that the CM’s claim on entry and removal of materials during an active search has prima facie disclosed cognisable offences, including theft.
The agency argued that once materials were forcibly taken away, it became impossible to determine whether they were confined to the Trinamool Congress’s proprietary data or also included evidence relevant to the money-laundering probe.
Rejecting Banerjee’s contention that the search was directed at Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC) or the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC), ED clarified that the warrant was issued in the name of Indian-PAC Consulting Private Limited, which it alleges received proceeds of crime in the coal smuggling case under investigation.
In its plea, ED has sought transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), contending that cross-FIRs registered by the Kolkata Police and allegations against central officers require a “holistic, comprehensive and coordinated” probe by an independent agency. The affidavit alleges “gross abuse of power by the state machinery” and collusion by senior police officials to obstruct ED officers in the discharge of their statutory functions under the PMLA.
It also criticised what it described as a “clean chit” given by state authorities to the CM and police officials without conducting any formal enquiry into the incident, arguing that such conduct underscores the need for an independent investigation.
In her earlier affidavit, Banerjee accused the ED of conducting a “pretextual raid” aimed at accessing sensitive political data ahead of elections and described the agency’s petition as an impermissible attempt by “accused persons to choose who investigates them”. She denied allegations of robbery, dacoity or obstruction, asserting that she had politely requested permission to retrieve confidential and proprietary data of the Trinamool Congress and that ED officers did not object. She also challenged the maintainability of the ED’s petition under Article 32, arguing that the dispute was, in essence, a constitutional conflict between the Union and a state.
The Supreme Court had on January 15 termed the confrontation between the central agency and the West Bengal government “very serious”, stayed proceedings arising from FIRs lodged by the Kolkata Police against ED officials, and directed preservation of CCTV footage and electronic records.
ED’s money laundering probe in the matter was based on a CBI case registered in November 2020 on allegations that coal was being illegally mined at Eastern Coalfields Ltd‘s mines in Kunustoria and Kajora in West Bengal. The agency previously questioned TMC general secretary Abhishek Banerjee, alleging that he is a beneficiary of funds obtained in the illegal mining.
ED has alleged that nearly ₹10 crore in proceeds of crime were routed to I-PAC through hawala channels and that the firm was paid by the Trinamool Congress for services during the 2022 Goa assembly elections. I-PAC has been associated with the TMC since the 2019 Lok Sabha polls and is currently engaged with the party ahead of upcoming Bengal elections.
