There was a heated debate in the Supreme Court hearing on Wednesday (February 18, 2026) on the raid case on the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC in Bengal and the residence of its co-founder Prateek Jain. A West Bengal police officer accused the ED of using it as a weapon, to which the ED lawyer replied that the investigating agency is terrorized.
The bench of Justice PK Mishra and Justice KV Vishwanathan was hearing the ED’s petition. ED has alleged in this petition that during the investigation, Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee reached the investigation site along with senior police officers and obstructed the investigation.
During the hearing on Wednesday, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for a West Bengal police officer, accused the ED of using it as a weapon. On this, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the ED, said that the ED is not being made a weapon, but has been intimidated. After this, the Supreme Court postponed the hearing till after Holi and gave the date of March 18.
Last week, senior advocate Kapil Sibal was unwell, due to which the hearing was adjourned. The main reason for the ED raid on IPAC office on January 8 was to investigate the hawala link in the money laundering case worth crores of rupees related to coal smuggling.
In its petition, ED has sought directions from the Supreme Court to register an FIR against Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, the state Director General of Police (DGP) and the Kolkata Police Commissioner. The agency alleges that its statutory duties were obstructed during the search operation.
In her counter affidavit, Mamata Banerjee has denied all the allegations. She says that she had gone to Prateek Jain’s Loudon Street residence and IPAC office in Bidhannagar on January 8, 2026 because she had received information that sensitive political data of Trinamool Congress was being accessed during the search.
It has been said in the affidavit that this data was deeply related to the strategy of the upcoming assembly elections. According to Mamata Banerjee, she had politely sought permission from the ED officials to take the party’s data and related equipment/files, to which the officials did not object. After collecting the data, she left from there so that there was no hindrance in the search process.
It has also been claimed in the affidavit that it is recorded in the ED’s Panchnama report that the search continued peacefully and in an orderly manner. The Chief Minister has also argued that neither Trinamool Congress nor its officials are accused in the coal scam, hence the ED has no right to claim confidential data of the party.
Accusing the ED of acting with malicious intent, the counter affidavit said the raid was conducted just before the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections and at a time when IPAC was in possession of important documents, including the list of potential candidates.
The affidavit also alleges violation of statutory safeguards under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and says the ED could not produce any audio or video recording of the search, raising questions over the transparency of the proceedings.
(With inputs from Nipun Sehgal)
