New Delhi, May 13 The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it would hear on May 22 the ED's plea alleging obstruction by 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.
The matter came up for hearing before a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N V Anjaria.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta requested the bench to keep the matter for hearing next week.
The bench observed that the matter may be listed in July after the partial court working days.
"Let it be listed next week. This was substantially argued," the top law officer said.
Then the apex court posted the matter on May 22.
In the recently concluded West Bengal Assembly 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 Enforcement Directorate on April 23 claimed in the apex court that Banerjee used the state machinery to obstruct its money laundering probe against I-PAC office in Kolkata.
The ED alleged that the then chief minister, 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 have questioned the maintainability of the ED's plea.
On March 24, the apex court 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.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Banerjee in the matter, had earlier argued that a person who moves the court under Article 32 of the Constitution has to specifically set out which fundamental right of his has been violated.
On January 15, the top court said the chief minister's alleged obstruction in the ED's probe was "very serious" and agreed to examine if a state's law-enforcing agencies can interfere with any central agency's investigation into any serious offence as it stayed FIRs against the ED officials who raided I-PAC.
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.
