SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(SC) 74

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, JJ.
Directorate of Enforcement & Anr. – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondent
Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s). 16 of 2026 With Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 17 of 2026
Decided On : 15-01-2026

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Suryaprakash V Raju, A.S.G. Mrs. K.M. Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Vikramjeet Banarjee, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Adv. Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv. Mr. Aman Mehta, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Debanjan Mandal, Adv. Mr. Kunal Mimani, AOR Mr. Parag Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Dasgupta, Adv. Ms. Mahima Cholera, Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kalyan Bandhopadhyay, Sr. Adv. Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, AOR Ms. Sirsanya Bandhopadhyay, Adv. Mr. Arka Kumar Nag, Adv. Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhisek Mohanty, Adv. Mr. Ansh Rajauria, Adv. Mr. Aparajita Jamwal, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Pahwa, Adv.

Interference by state agencies in central investigations undermines the rule of law, necessitating judicial intervention and proper registration of FIRs for cognizable offences.

Headnote:(A) Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Investigation by Directorate of Enforcement - Interference by State agencies - The Directorate of Enforcement is investigating a scam amounting to Rs.2742.32 crores, with allegations of interference by the Chief Minister and top police officials during a search and seizure - The Court finds this raises serious issues regarding the independence of investigations. (Paras 3, 5, 16, 17)

(B) Mandate for FIR - The Court emphasizes the necessity of registering FIRs for cognizable offences as per Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, which is significant in the context of agency investigations. (Para 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitions arise from alleged illegal interference during the Enforcement Directorate's investigation into a substantial scam, culminating in actions by high-level state officials during ongoing investigations.

Findings of Court:
The Court sees merit in examining the state's interference with central agency investigations, reinforcing the necessity for rule of law.

Issues: The crucial issues involve the legality of the interference by state officials in a central investigation and the implications for independent law enforcement.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court indicates that any obstruction to federal investigations under the guise of political activity undermines the legal framework and requires judicial oversight.

Result: Notice issued to respondents; further investigation proceedings stayed.

Table of Content
1. introduction of petitioners and case background. (Para 1)
2. claims of interference during the investigation. (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. interference by officials during a search. (Para 3)
4. legal requirements for firs and investigation integrity. (Para 8 , 9)
5. arguments against maintainability and interference claims. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
6. acknowledgment of affected proceedings. (Para 15)
7. court's recognition of serious issues and implications. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
8. orders issued by the court. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)

ORDER

1. In Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 16/2026, the petitioners are the Directorate of Enforcement and its Deputy Directors, whereas in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 17/2026, the petitioners are the officers of Enforcement Directorate, who had gone to the subject premises during the course of investigation, conducted by the Directorate of Enforcement.

2. Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General, appearing for the petitioners, would draw our attention to a series of events which has led to filing of the present Writ Petitions. According to him, the Directorate of Enforcement was investigating a scam amounting to Rs.2742.32 crores, since the year 2020 and during the course of investigation of the said scam, intelligence was received that about Rs.20 crores of the proceeds of crime from Kolkata to Goa was transferred through R Kanti Lal firm and has eventually channeled into IPAC’s operational framework by being handed over to persons executing its work.

3. Armed with authorization to carry out search and seizure proceedings at the residential premises of Mr. Pratik Jain of IPAC, the officers visited his premises, amongst other premises, on 08.01.2026; and when the search was going on, Shri Priyobrato, IPS, Deputy Commissioner of Police and Shri Manoj Kumar Verma, IPS, Commissioner of police, Kolkata entered the premises and thereafter, the second respondent in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 17/2026, the sitting Hon’ble Chief Minister of the State of West Bengal, Smt. Mamata Banerjee also entered the premises despite making categorical request for not interfering with the ongoing search proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

4. He would submit that this is not a singular incident where Hon’ble Chief Minister has entered the premises under investigation, as on an earlier occasion when the Central Bureau of Investigation was investigating an offence, a similar event has happened. Therefore, there is a pattern of interference with the investigation carried out by the Central Agencies.

5. According to him, the materials collected by the investigation team of Directorate of Enforcement were taken away by the respondents in an illegal manner and thereafter, the West Bengal Police has registered several FIRs against the officers of the Enforcement Directorate.

6. Learned Solicitor General would next submit that in a situation like this, it is difficult for the Central Agencies to carry on the investigations which has connection with a huge scam to the tune of Rs.2742.32 crores. Learned Solicitor General would submit that, true it is, the petitioner Directorate of Enforcement has preferred a Writ Petition before the Kolkata High Court, but when the matter was to be taken up for hearing on 09.01.2026, the legal cell of the Trinmool Congress sent a message to its members on whatsapp, calling them to assemble in the Court; and thereafter, what has happened in the Court has been recorded by the learned Judge of the Calcutta High Court in its proceedings dated 12.01.2026, which is reproduced hereunder:

    “The matter is taken up for consideration. At this juncture a huge number of learned advocates as well as other persons enter the Court room and create enormous disturbance and commotion. Several requests made by the Court to maintain the decorum and dignity of the Court so that the matter can be taken up for consideration fell on deaf ears. The environment in the Court room is not

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top