CBI, ED offices in Kolkata not safe for investigation; evidence will be taken away: ED to Delhi High Court

Appearing for the Enforcement Directorate (ED), Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju on Wednesday told the Delhi High Court that the city of Kolkata is not safe for conducting ED and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probes.

The ASG said that obstructions have been previously created by the Chief Minister of West Bengal Mamata Banerjee to such investigations.

The submission was made during the hearing of petitions filed by two political consultants and directors of Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC) Rishi Raj Singh and Pratik Jain seeking quashing of the ED summons issued to them in relation to a coal smuggling case. The two directors are currently strategising upcoming elections in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal.

When the Court asked why Pratik Jain cannot be permitted to appear before the ED office in Kolkata, the ASG stated,

“CBI office is not safe. Some ministers came to the CBI office and threatened and did not allow investigation to go on. That is the state of affairs in Calcutta. Even my office [ED office] is not safe in Calcutta. If he comes to Calcutta, it will not be safe for the ED officers to interrogate him because of his political connections. I will tell what happened - when we searched his premise and seized incriminating material, the Chief Minister of Bengal, Director General of Police Bengal and the Police Commissioner came to the residence and office and seized Incriminating material. There is interference in CBI, ED investigation in West Bengal. There can't be any fair investigation.” 

ASG Raju further stated that incriminating material found by the ED during the course of investigation can be illegally seized from them in Kolkata.

“We were obstructed [in Kolkata]. There, when we went and searched and found incriminating material, the Chief Minister barged in and took all the incriminating material. Allegations are serious. Calcutta is not safe as far as investigation is concerned. There are apprehensions that the moment we get any incriminating evidence, it will be seized and taken away illegally.”

Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani today recorded the ED’s willingness to defer the directors’ appearance on summons and sought the agency's response on the petitions.

“ASG Mr Raju states that the ED would be willing to give to the petitioner a short date of after April 2 for calling for his appearance at ED office in Delhi without prejudice to their rights and contentions in the present case. He agrees to file a response. Let reply affidavit be filed in 5 days," the Court stated in its order.

Similar orders were passed in Rishi Raj’s petition as well.

When ASG Raju opposed issuance of notice in these petitions, the Court asked,

“How can investigating agency not consider this fair? Despite the fact that the matter has been going on for more than five years. How is this not fair?”

ASG Raju explained,

“Suppose I want to confront him with a document in my possession. I can't confront him through VC. If I show it on VC, that document will be known to everybody. I don't know who else is watching that or how the system is manipulated. I don't want to take the risk.” 

The Court suggested that the ED officers in Kolkata office can confront the accused with the document. Justice Bhambhani asked the ASG,

“He [Jain] will appear physically. He will go to ED office in Kolkata, that is safe?” 

The ASG responded,

“Election duty does not come in his way. The question of him not attending [summons] due to election duty is bogus. I can understand if he has been hospitalised, fractured, not able to move.”

Appearing for Jain, Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa submitted that after the present petition was filed, the ED has issued a fresh summons to the directors to appear before the agency's Delhi office on April 2.

He submitted that Jain is willing to appear through VC or physically at the ED's Kolkata office, as he is preoccupied with election consulting duties in Kolkata, making it difficult for him to leave the city at this point.

"He is ready and willing to subsequently appear even physically upon conclusion of the elections on April 29," Pahwa said.

The Court recorded the submissions made on behalf of Jain, “the petitioner [Jain] impugned summons dated March 2, 2026 issued by ED. By the said summons, the petitioner was directed to appear for investigation before the investigating officer of the ED in Delhi on March 9. It transpires that the petitioner sent a representation to the IO vide email dated March 9, seeking certain accomodation in relation to his recording statements under section 50 PMLA, which was declined rescheduling the date for appearance to March 16. “

At the outset, ASG Raju stated that the summons are now redundant inasmuch as date of appearance and rescheduling dates have passed.

The Court responded,

“Please don't stand on technicality that the petition is not maintainable because the date for summons is gone. Why dont you catch the bull by the horn? Please proceed with the investigation.”

The next date of hearing is April 9.

The petition filed by Rishi Raj was initially listed before Justice Manoj Jain. 

Senior Advocate Siddharth Agarwal, appearing for Rishi Raj, stated,

“I am based in Chennai and Bangalore for elections. We are in the last phase of those elections, the timing of this notice is peculiarly because of that. I am only asking, his investigation has been going on for the last 6 years, if for 4 weeks till end of April my personal presence is not insisted upon, heavens will not fall. I am willing to appear on VC at Chennai...This is to disrupt the process I am my client is engaged in.”

On being informed that a similar petition by Pratik Jain is listed before Justice Bhambhani, Justice Manoj Jain referred this matter to that court for being considered together. 

“The petitioner is director of I-PAC and seeks quashing of ED’s summons at the New Delhi office after filing of petition, there has been fresh issue of summons, he has now been directed to appear tomorrow at 2pm. The other director Pratik Jain has also received a similar kind of notice from ED and even he has also filed a similar petition. It is coming up for hearing before the coordinate bench presided by Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani. In order to avoid any possibility of any conflicting opinion, subject to the order, today at 3.30pm at that court,” Justice Manoj Jain had recorded.