Supreme Court Intervenes in I-PAC Raid Controversy, Puts WB Police Action on Hold
The Supreme Court of India stepped into the heated I-PAC raid dispute on Thursday. The court issued a formal notice to West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and other senior state officials. This action came after the Enforcement Directorate raised serious allegations regarding raids at I-PAC, a political consultancy firm linked to the Trinamool Congress.
Court Directs Mamata Banerjee to File Response
A bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi delivered the order. The bench directed Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee to submit her detailed response to the court within a strict period of two weeks. The court set this deadline to ensure a swift examination of the matter.
The Supreme Court also took a decisive step to halt any immediate police investigation. The bench ordered a complete stay on all probes by the West Bengal Police. This stay applies specifically to investigations based on an FIR lodged against ED officials involved in the I-PAC office raids.
Preservation of Evidence Ordered
In a crucial move to preserve potential evidence, the court issued clear instructions to the West Bengal state government. The authorities must now secure and maintain all CCTV footage from the I-PAC office premises. The order also extends to video recordings from nearby areas surrounding the consultancy firm's location.
This preservation order aims to prevent the loss or tampering of digital evidence that could be vital for the case.
Next Hearing Scheduled for February
The Supreme Court has listed the matter for its next hearing on February 3, 2026. This date gives both parties time to prepare their submissions and allows the court to review the chief minister's response. The legal proceedings will determine the future course of action in this politically sensitive case.
The court's intervention marks a significant development in the ongoing tussle between central agencies and the West Bengal state administration. The outcome of this case could have wider implications for federal relations and the conduct of investigations involving political entities.
