It is an open secret that ED becomes super active in the run-up to national and state elections and start aggressive actions against leaders of opposition, sending them notices, asking them to appear, raiding their premises and even seizing their important documents and finances which weaken the opposition parties derail their political campaigns and adversely influence their political performance in terms of seats. It helps the ruling BJP and NDA to grab power and defeat the opposition easily. Even Supreme Court has made adverse comment on the ED and said it can’t function as a tool for the Union Government. The question is not yet settled if ED functions as a political tool of the ruling establishment led by PM Narendra Modi, though the entire opposition allege it so.

West Bengal and Tamil Nadu are the two states among the five going to poll in April-May 2026, and we see how ED has become active. Numerous ED actions are being reported from both the states against the opposition leaders. On January 8, ED had raided the office of political consultancy firm I-PAC in Salt Lake and the Kolkata residence of its director, Pratik Jain, in connection with an old coal smuggling case. Since I-PAC works for the TMC, it is obvious that sensitive political data of the party are with them, which is crucial for the Mamata Banerjee to win the election for the third consecutive term. BJP is trying to wrest power from TMC in the state, and PM and Union Home Minister have repeatedly said that West Bengal is their top target. ED action is therefore politically sensitive.

On ED’s allegation that it faced obstruction from the West Bengal government and Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee during their raids at the I-PAC office and premises of its director, the Supreme Court Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul Pancholi, termed it “very serious”, and said they intend to issue notice and examine the matter. “This is a very serious matter; we will issue a notice. We have to examine it,” it remarked orally.

There was also a scene created in the Calcutta High Court on January 9 on this matter, on which the bench said it was very much disturbed by the commotion at the Calcutta High Court during its hearing in the ED raids case. It should be noted that after the commotion, the Calcutta High Court had adjourned till January 14 the hearing on petitions related to the ED’s search and seizure operations at sites linked to political consultancy firm I-PAC, citing unmanageable chaos inside the courtroom.

West Bengal government’s “interference and obstruction” during the probe agency’s raids reflects a very shocking patter. SG Tushar Mehta appearing for ED told the bench that it would encourage others and demoralize central forces. “The States will feel they can barge in, commit theft, and then sit on a dharna. Let an example be set, officers who were explicitly present there should be suspended,” the SG Mehta said.

As for the commotion Calcutta High Court, SG Mehta said that a large number of advocates and other persons entered the court during hearing, which was to be adjourned, adding “This happens when mobocracy replaces democracy.”

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal opposed the ED plea and said the case should be heard first in the High Court. He said, “It is a blatant lie that all digital devices were taken. Allegation that CM Mamata Banerjee took all devices is a lie, substantiated by ED’s own panchnama (search record).” He also said, “The last statement in the coal scam was recorded in February 2024; what was ED doing since then? Why so keen in the midst of elections?”

Though ED has claimed that Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee entered the premises and took away “key” evidence related to the probe, Mamata has accused the central agency of overreach, and the West Bengal Police have also registered an FIR against ED officers, which Supreme Court has stayed today.

Appearing for CM Mamata, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said, “We all know I-PAC takes care of elections in West Bengal. There is a formal contract between I-PAC and TMC," he said, adding "Election data is confidential and it is all kept there. There will be a lot of info on candidates etc. Once you have info, how do we fight the election? Chairman (Banerjee) has the right to protect it and thus went there.”

The entire episode can’t be taken as simply administrative issue. ED actions are not always purely administrative, given their super active character before or during elections, that too acting chiefly against opposition leaders. Since 2014, 95 per cent cases have been registered against leaders of opposition, with only 0.1 per cent conviction in corruption cases as of July 2025. It shows that ED do not have enough evidence against the opposition leaders.

Even before General Election 2024, several leaders faced ED action which included AAP leader and Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal, JMM leader and Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren, and Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi.

Government’s stance is that they are bent upon taking action against the “pack of corrupt” (as PM Narendra Modi has termed the leaders of opposition and INDIA bloc). Court have also noted several times that political status does not provide immunity for legal action, even if arrests occur close to elections, but they have also said that ED must not act as a political tool of the ruling establishment.

This is high time that the Supreme Court must take into consideration the entire political background along with ED’s actions, and possible misuse of the investigating agency by the ruling establishment. There must be some guideline for level playing field during elections for all political parties, and ruling establishment must be restrained from derailing opposition campaigns and influence electoral outcomes through so called legal actions. (IPA Service)