Daijiworld Media Network - Kolkata

Kolkata, Jan 10: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has claimed it possesses adequate evidence to prove in court that its officials and accompanying Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) personnel were obstructed and heckled by West Bengal Police and Kolkata Police during search operations conducted on January 8, agency sources said on Saturday.

The raids were carried out simultaneously at the Kolkata office of the India Political Action Committee (I-PAC) and the residence of I-PAC co-founder Pratik Jain, with officials asserting that the most serious impediments were faced at Jain’s Loudon Street residence in central Kolkata.

While ED officials have not publicly disclosed the nature of the evidence, sources clarified that it does not include CCTV footage from either Jain’s residence or the I-PAC office in Salt Lake. However, they claimed the agency has sufficient material to substantiate allegations of misconduct by state police personnel, both at the entry gate—where CAPF personnel were allegedly obstructed—and inside the residence, where ED officials were reportedly confronted.

In response to the incident, the ED has approached the Supreme Court seeking urgent intervention. Anticipating legal action, the West Bengal government has filed a caveat in the apex court to ensure that no ex parte order is passed without hearing the state’s side.

Earlier, the ED had moved the Calcutta High Court, filing a petition before a single-judge bench of Justice Suvra Ghosh. In its plea, the agency accused chief minister Mamata Banerjee, along with senior administrative and police officials, of misusing constitutional authority to interfere with the functioning of central agencies.

However, the matter could not be heard on Friday due to overcrowding in the courtroom, prompting Justice Ghosh to adjourn the hearing to January 14. Later the same day, the ED sought an urgent hearing before a division bench led by Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul, requesting that the matter be taken up immediately or assigned to another single-judge bench. The division bench declined the request and upheld January 14 as the next hearing date.

Following this, the ED escalated the matter to the Supreme Court, seeking immediate relief and clarity on the alleged obstruction faced during the execution of its duties.