Kolkata, Jan 14 (IANS) The Calcutta High Court’s single-judge bench of Justice Suvra Ghosh on Wednesday accepted the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) submission that the central agency’s officials could not seize anything during the January 8 raids and search operations at the Indian Political Action Committee’s (I-PAC) office in Salt Lake and at I-PAC co-founder Pratik Jain’s residence in central Kolkata.

Justice Ghosh’s bench, hence, disposed of the petition filed by the Trinamool Congress, which had accused the ED of collecting confidential party documents during the searches. Trinamool Congress had claimed I-PAC has been working as its vote-strategy agency since 2020.

As the matter came up for hearing on Wednesday afternoon, ED counsel and Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju submitted in court that ED officials could not seize any document from the two premises during the searches conducted in connection with a money laundering probe.

The Additional Solicitor General also submitted that whatever documents ED officials were attempting to collect during the raid were taken away by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee.

Raju repeatedly insisted that his submissions on these two points be recorded. Thereafter, Justice Ghosh disposed of the Trinamool Congress petition, accepting the ED’s stand in the matter.

On allegations that the ED collected confidential party documents from the two premises, the Additional Solicitor General argued that Trinamool Congress should instead file a case against Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, since it was she who allegedly took away the documents.

Raju also argued that the person who filed the affidavit on behalf of the Trinamool Congress was not present at the spots during the January 8 search operations and therefore had no direct knowledge of what happened during the raid.

“He is not supposed to know what documents were taken or what happened there. The affidavit in this case was given only after hearing some information. Therefore, this case should be dismissed,” Raju argued.

His argument prevailed and the case was disposed of.

Meanwhile, in the main petition filed by the ED accusing the Chief Minister of misusing her constitutional position by allegedly creating hindrances to the official duties of ED officials during the searches on January 8, the hearing was adjourned by the Calcutta High Court on Wednesday.

The Additional Solicitor General sought an adjournment, stating that an ED petition in the same matter is pending before the Supreme Court.

–IANS

src/pgh