If sitting CM commits an offence can CBI investigate it ED asks SC to decide
The Enforcement Directorate on Tuesday urged the Supreme Court to decide whether the CBI can investigate or not if an offence is committed by a sitting
chief minister.
A bench of justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and NV Anjaria was hearing a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) alleging obstruction by the then West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee and other state authorities during its January 8 search of the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC in Kolkata.
At the outset, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for TMC supremo Mamata Banerjee, submitted that now that the Government has changed, the prayer for sanction and transfer to local police can be done by the state Government and nothing remains in the matter. At this juncture, Justice Mishra remarked that pursuant to the subsequent changes (in regime), nothing remains and the matter can be disposed of by allowing the ED’s prayer for the transfer of investigation to the CBI.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, requested the court that the larger issue must be decided.
“We don’t want to face any allegations that the state Government, because of political reasons, has done it. Either we are right or wrong; I want the court to decide. I don’t wish to fall in the death trap that, subsequent to the changes in the Government, the state transferred it to the CBI,” Mehta said.
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju contended that the court must decide whether the CBI can investigate a sitting chief minister if an offence is committed.
“The issue is whether a sitting chief minister, who happens to be the Home Minister, if she commits a crime, is it an appropriate case for the CBI to investigate or not?” Raju said.
The top court has posted the matter for hearing on September 2.
In the recently-concluded West Bengal elections, the BJP secured a historic win with 207 seats in the 294-member house, ending the 15-year rule of the Mamata Banerjee-led TMC.
Alleging complete breakdown of law and order in West Bengal, the ED on April 23 claimed in the apex court that Banerjee used the state machinery to obstruct its money laundering probe against I-PAC.
The ED alleged that Banerjee, accompanied by a large police contingent, personally intervened to halt the search and seize evidence collected by federal agency officers.
While hearing arguments in the matter on April 22, the top court observed that democracy is put in peril if a chief minister intervenes in a probe.
The ED is seeking a direction to transfer the investigation into the alleged obstruction and the “retaliatory” FIRs to the CBI, saying that an independent agency is required to investigate the conduct of Banerjee and the state’s top police brass.
The West Bengal Government and other respondents had questioned the maintainability of the ED’s plea.
On March 24, the apex court had questioned the West Bengal Government over its objection to the maintainability of the ED’s plea.
The court had remarked that some ED officers had filed petitions in their individual capacity seeking to know whether they had ceased to be citizens of India merely because they were officers of the agency.
The ED has alleged interference and obstruction by the state Government, including by Banerjee, in its probe and search operation at the I-PAC office and the premises of its director, Pratik Jain, in connection with an alleged coal-pilferage scam.
The top court, while staying the FIRs filed in West Bengal against the ED officials, had also directed the state police to preserve the CCTV footage of the raids.
It had issued notices to Banerjee, the West Bengal Government, former state director general of police Rajeev Kumar and top cops on the ED’s petitions seeking a CBI probe against them for allegedly obstructing its raids.
