Mamata’s actions show a rule of law gap in Bengal, ED tells SC

E-PaperSubscribeSubscribeEnjoy unlimited accessSubscribe Now! Get features like The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday told the Supreme Court that West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee’s actions in obstructing its probe into political strategy firm I-PAC reflect a “pattern” of absence of rule of law in the state, even as it clarified that it was not suggesting a “breakdown of constitutional machinery” in the state. Mamata’s actions show a rule of law gap in Bengal, ED tells SCIn a plea filed in January, ED officers alleged violations of their fundamental rights and sought a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the January 8 incident, when the agency’s investigation into I-PAC was allegedly obstructed by the chief minister and senior police officers, who entered the premises during a raid and took away documents linked to the ₹2,400 crore coal scam. Citing past instances where the Trinamool Congress (TMC) chief allegedly interfered in an ongoing CBI probe into a chit fund scam involving party leaders, the ED argued that it cannot approach the state police due to interference by senior state functionaries. A bench of justices PK Mishra and NV Anjaria said, “You are seriously arguing the absence of rule of law. We hope that you are not driving at the breakdown of constitutional machinery in the state.” Appearing for the ED, solicitor general Tushar Mehta said, “The ED cannot argue the breakdown of constitutional machinery. What is being argued is that rule of law is absent in the state and since rule of law is linked with Article 14 of the Constitution, it gives me locus (legal right) to file a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution for protection of my fundamental rights.” “We are only asking you if you are contemplating such an argument,” the bench clarified. A day earlier, the court had observed that the chief minister had put democracy in “jeopardy” by barging into an ongoing investigation using the entire system at her command. Appearing for the state police officers, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy told the bench that the proceedings before the court are being used for political campaigning in West Bengal where elections are underway. Objecting to AG’s attempt to prejudice the proceedings, Guruswamy said, “He uses these proceedings to put it on social media. Let him not abuse the proceedings in court to be used as a social media weapon in a political campaign.” The court said that it has no control over what the media reports. However, during the hearing, the bench cited an instance where the DGP visited the I-PAC premises on January 8 on a complaint received by the I-PAC functionary Prateek Jain’s family alleging house trespass. The ED officials satisfied the DGP and senior police officials by showing them a valid authorisation letter. ED’s raid against I-PAC came in connection with the money laundering probe into illegal coal mining based on a first information report registered by CBI in November 2020. The allegations pertain to coal illegally mined from Eastern Coalfields Ltd mines in the state in which the ED has already questioned TMC general secretary and MP Abhishek Banerjee, accusing him of being a beneficiary of the alleged scam. Earlier, the CM had filed an affidavit denying allegations that she obstructed ED probe and took away documents from Jain’s residence. Her response said that she had only retrieved the party’s confidential documents from the I-PAC office with the consent of the ED officers present at the site. Justice Mishra said, “The DGP sees the authorisation letter and yet they register FIR against the ED officials at the behest of the CM. There is a lot I want to say but I am restraining myself as everything is being reported.” Mehta said, “This is not an isolated instance when the CM barges into an ongoing investigation and thwarts it. There is a complete and total failure of rule of law and order in the state.” He pointed out the present case involves illegal smuggling of coal worth over ₹2,700 crore. This money was channelled into I-PAC for which ED was conducting a raid at I-PAC offices and residences of its functionaries, he added. The Bengal government has raised a preliminary objection on entertaining ED’s petition claiming that violation of fundamental rights can be claimed only by a citizen and not a department of the government. A battery of senior lawyers comprising Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Kapil Sibal and Shyam Divan among others had submitted for the state that even ED officials cannot maintain a petition as they are seeking relief in their capacity as ED officers and not individually. Additional solicitor general (ASG) SV Raju appearing in another petition filed by ED officials involved in the I-PAC raid said that the crime registered against them impacts them individually regardless of the cloak they wear. The court asked Raju, “Are you at the same page as solicitor general” pointing out that Mehta argued that merely because a person is an ED officer, he does not cease to be a citizen of the country and ED seeks to represent the collective interest of such officers. Mehta pointed out that the state of West Bengal too has filed a petition under Article 32 along with several other states and on each occasion, the court has entertained it and passed orders. The bench said, “Like you have claimed that ED officers coincidentally have individual rights, does CM not have individual rights?“ However, the court was of the view that entertaining Article 32 petitions at the behest of states has an “inherent danger” as it will open floodgates. Mehta said that such discretion could be exercised by court on a case-to-case basis. The court posted the matter for further hearing on May 13 and extended its January 15 order staying the FIRs lodged against ED officials.