Politics – On Tuesday, Suvendu Adhikari, the Leader of Opposition in the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, alleged that Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee made conflicting claims about her actions during a recent Enforcement Directorate search operation in Kolkata. He said the statements she submitted in an affidavit before the Supreme Court do not align with remarks she made publicly on the day the search took place.
According to Adhikari, the differences between the Chief Minister’s account before the court and her earlier comments raise serious questions about the accuracy of her version of events. He addressed the issue while speaking to reporters on Tuesday afternoon, shortly after developments in the Supreme Court hearing became public.
The controversy stems from a search conducted by the Enforcement Directorate at the office and residence of Pratik Jain, co-founder of the Indian Political Action Committee, in Kolkata on January 8. During that operation, the Chief Minister had arrived at the premises and interacted with officials on site.
Adhikari claimed that in her affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court, the Chief Minister stated that she had taken certain documents from the premises only after obtaining consent from Enforcement Directorate officials. However, he alleged that her statements on January 8 told a different story.
On the day of the search, the Chief Minister was seen addressing media cameras, where she reportedly said that she had collected all relevant documents herself and did not allow enforcement officials to take anything away. Adhikari argued that this public declaration stands in clear contrast to what has now been stated in her sworn affidavit.
Addressing reporters, the Leader of Opposition said the Chief Minister’s explanations have changed over time, creating confusion about what exactly occurred during the search. He alleged that these shifting statements could undermine the credibility of her claims.
Adhikari further asserted that the contradictions were evident enough to be easily understood by anyone comparing the two versions side by side. He alleged that fear of legal consequences may be driving these inconsistencies, though he did not present additional evidence beyond the statements already on record.
The ruling party has not issued a fresh public response to these specific allegations at the time of reporting.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court on Tuesday postponed further hearing in the matter to February 10. The case relates to a petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate concerning alleged interference during the January 8 search operation.
A bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul M. Pancholi agreed to adjourn the proceedings after the Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, sought additional time to respond to the counter affidavit filed by the West Bengal government.
Mehta informed the court that the state government’s response had been submitted earlier on Tuesday, leaving the central agency with limited time to review its contents. He said the Enforcement Directorate required adequate time to examine the affidavit and prepare a formal rejoinder for the court’s consideration.
Accepting the request, the bench scheduled the matter for further hearing on February 10. The court did not make any observations on the merits of the allegations during Tuesday’s brief proceedings.
The case has drawn significant political attention in West Bengal, as it involves both constitutional authorities and an ongoing investigation by a central agency. Legal observers note that the next hearing may provide greater clarity on the competing claims once all responses are formally placed on record.
Until then, the matter remains sub judice, with both sides expected to rely on documentary evidence and recorded statements to support their positions before the apex court.
