Supreme Court ने West Bengal I‑PAC खोज मामले में ED की न्यायाधीश के पास जाने की प्रक्रिया पर सवाल उठाए

<p>The <span class="key-term" data-definition="Supreme Court — India's apex judicial body, final interpreter of the Constitution (GS2: Polity)">Supreme Court</span> ने 22 April 2026 को <span class="key-term" data-definition="Enforcement Directorate (ED) — Central agency under the Ministry of Finance tasked with enforcing economic laws and investigating money‑laundering (GS2: Polity)">Enforcement Directorate</span> (ED) द्वारा दायर याचिका की सुनवाई की, जिसमें West Bengal Chief Minister <strong>Mamata Banerjee</strong> और राज्य पुलिस अधिकारियों के खिलाफ CBI‑registered FIR की मांग की गई थी, क्योंकि उनका आरोप है कि उन्होंने I‑PAC के कार्यालय में खोज में बाधा डाली। यह मामला यह प्रश्न उठाता है कि जब एक बैठा हुआ मुख्यमंत्री जांच में हस्तक्षेप करने का आरोप हो, तो सामान्य वैधानिक उपायों की प्रयोज्यता पर असाधारण प्रश्न उठते हैं।</p> <h3>Key Developments</h3> <ul> <li>The bench of <strong>Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra</strong> and <strong>Justice N V Anjaria</strong> highlighted recent incidents where judicial officers on <span class="key-term" data-definition="Special Intensive Revision (SIR) duty — A special assignment of judicial officers to review pending cases and ensure speedy justice (GS2: Polity)">Special Intensive Revision</span> duty were gheraoed in West Bengal, underscoring a deteriorating law‑and‑order environment.</li> <li>Senior Advocate <strong>Menaka Guruswamy</strong> argued that the dispute should be framed under <span class="key-term" data-definition="Article 131 — Constitutional provision empowering the Supreme Court to adjudicate disputes between the Union and a State (GS2: Polity)">Article 131</span>, as it pits the Union (ED) against a State (West Bengal).</li> <li>The Court rejected this view, noting that when a chief minister allegedly interferes with an investigation, the matter cannot be reduced to a mere inter‑governmental dispute.</li> <li>Senior Advocate <strong>Sidharth Luthra</strong> contended that the existing procedural route—police report under Section 154(3) followed by magistrate direction under Section 156(3)—remains valid, citing the judgment in <em>Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P.</em> and the <span class="key-term" data-definition="Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — New criminal procedural code replacing the 1860 Code of Criminal Procedure (GS2: Polity)">Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita</span> as the governing framework.</li> <li>Justice Mishra warned that the Court cannot ignore the “extraordinary” socio‑political realities in the state, especially during an election year.</li> </ul> <h3>Important Facts</h3> <p>• केस संख्या: <strong>W.P.(Crl.) No. 16/2026</strong> – <strong>Directorate of Enforcement and Anr. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.</strong><br> • याचिका का उद्देश्य ED को CBI FIR दाखिल करने का निर्देश देना है, जिससे राज्य‑स्तर के न्यायाधीश के मार्ग को बायपास किया जा सके।<br> • राज्य ने r</p>