• Latest
Supreme Court

Can ED seek remedy from State if CM disrupts raid? Supreme Court asks Bengal

24 March 2026
Ranchi eye specialists honoured at Global Ophthalmology Conference in Brazil

Ranchi eye specialists honoured at Global Ophthalmology Conference in Brazil

3 June 2026
News diary

1. Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren targets ₹3,000 crore from sand ghats 2. 21 killed, including 17 foreign nationals, in Delhi hotel fire and more stories

3 June 2026
Jharkhand CM directs faster execution of logistics park, World Trade Centre projects

Jharkhand CM directs faster execution of logistics park, World Trade Centre projects

3 June 2026
Expelled TMC leader Ritabrata Banerjee gets LoP status in Bengal assembly

Expelled TMC leader Ritabrata Banerjee gets LoP status in Bengal assembly

3 June 2026
21 killed, including 17 foreign nationals, in Delhi hotel fire

21 killed, including 17 foreign nationals, in Delhi hotel fire

3 June 2026
Supreme Court

SC calls mobile phones ‘virtual gambling houses’, flags online gaming addiction threat

3 June 2026
The Jharkhand Story
  • Breaking News!
  • Advertise with us
  • Governance
  • Fashion
  • Education
  • Tribal Crafts
  • Judiciary
  • Careers
  • Politics
  • Climate Updates
  • Crime
  • Industries & Mining
Thursday, June 4, 2026
No Result
View All Result
The Jharkhand Story
No Result
View All Result
Home Breaking

Can ED seek remedy from State if CM disrupts raid? Supreme Court asks Bengal

Jharkhand Story by Jharkhand Story
24 March 2026
in Breaking, Judiciary
Supreme Court
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

THE JHARKHAND STORY DESK  

 

New Delhi, March 24: The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned whether the Enforcement Directorate (ED) can seek relief from a State government when allegations of obstruction are against the State itself, in connection with the disruption of an ED raid in West Bengal.

A bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N.V. Anjaria was hearing petitions filed by the ED and its officers seeking a CBI probe into the alleged obstruction of a raid at the I-PAC office, linked to the Trinamool Congress.

Court Questions Remedy Against State

During the hearing, the Court raised concerns over the State’s argument that the ED should approach local authorities for a remedy.

“The Chief Minister barges into an ED investigation, and your remedy is to go to the State government headed by the same Chief Minister?” Justice Mishra asked.

The Court indicated that such a remedy may not be appropriate when the allegations involve the State machinery itself.

Debate on Maintainability of Petition

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the West Bengal government, argued that the ED cannot invoke Article 32 of the Constitution. He said investigative agencies do not have a fundamental right to investigate and must follow statutory remedies.

He also warned that allowing such petitions could open a “Pandora’s box,” as it would enable government agencies to directly approach constitutional courts.

ALSO READ: SIR smooth across India except West Bengal: Supreme Court

SC Says ED Officers Are Still Citizens

The Court, however, observed that individual ED officers can approach the Supreme Court if their fundamental rights are violated.

“Merely because they are ED officers, do they cease to be citizens of India?” Justice Mishra remarked.

The bench suggested that officers, as individuals, retain their constitutional rights even while performing official duties.

Allegations of Obstruction During Raid

According to the ED, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, along with party leaders and police officials, entered the premises during the raid and allegedly interfered with the investigation, including removal of documents and devices.

Following the incident, the West Bengal Police registered FIRs against ED officials, which have been challenged before the Court.

State’s Stand and Legal Issues

The State government has denied wrongdoing and argued that police acted on information about suspicious persons at the premises.

It also raised objections on jurisdiction, suggesting that disputes between the Centre and State should be dealt under Article 131 of the Constitution, not Article 32.

Case to Continue in April

The Supreme Court has indicated that arguments on the maintainability of the petitions will continue, with the matter likely to be taken up again in April.

 

 

Tags: Article 32 maintainabilityCBI probe demandED vs West BengalI-PAC raid caseMamata Banerjee ED controversySC hearing March 2026Supreme Court ED raid case
ShareTweetShareSendSendShare
Next Post
News diary

1. SC: Conversion to Christianity ends Scheduled Caste status, SC/ST Act protection 2. Record of Rights Final: Jharkhand High Court dismisses delayed land claim and more stories

  • About Editor
  • About Us
  • Advertise with us
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap
  • Terms & Conditions
  • The jharkhand Story
Mail us : thejharkhandstory@gmail.com

© 2025 The Jharkhand Story

No Result
View All Result
  • About Editor
  • About Us
  • Advertise with us
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap
  • Terms & Conditions
  • The jharkhand Story