Supreme Court Grills Bengal Government Over ED Raids Obstruction by Banerjee

Federalism and Agency Powers

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Ms. Banerjee, argued that an officer of the ED does not possess a fundamental right to investigate, as the power is drawn strictly from the PMLA. He contended that the Centre cannot utilize Article 32 by using the ED as a front, as this article is reserved for individuals seeking protection against encroachments on civil rights. Sibal warned that allowing Central agencies and government departments to approach the court under this article could lead to a cascade of petitions against each other and private citizens. He stressed that the principle of federalism, a basic feature of the Constitution, would be compromised if States were treated as mere appendages to the Centre. Divan further noted that statutes creating other agencies like the CBI, the Narcotics Control Bureau, the Intelligence Bureau, the Serious Fraud Investigation Office, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, or the West Bengal Criminal Investigation Department were not authorized to sue. He requested the apex court to refer the case to a Constitution Bench to address these constitutional questions regarding the power of state machinery to sue.

Key Takeaways

• The Supreme Court questioned the West Bengal government on whether the ED should merely watch if the Chief Minister obstructs raids.
• West Bengal argues the ED is not a legal person with the right to sue under Article 32 of the Constitution.
• Justice Mishra noted the situation is unusual and warned against creating a legal vacuum regarding remedies for obstruction.
• The ED is investigating a ₹2,742-crore coal smuggling case, which the CM allegedly interfered with during January raids.
• Legal counsel for the CM warned that Central agencies using Article 32 could undermine the federal structure of the nation.

Summary

The Supreme Court has scheduled the next hearing for March 24 to continue deliberating on the maintainability of the ED's petition. This case follows a previous order on January 15 where the apex court stayed the Kolkata Police probe against ED officers, based on allegations that election records were stolen during the raids. The ongoing legal battle underscores the complex relationship between Central investigative agencies and State authorities, raising serious questions about the scope of investigations and the potential for interference by State agencies. The outcome will likely set a precedent for how enforcement directives are handled when executive obstruction occurs at the highest political levels.