PolityGovernance
News 2 of 33

SC Hears ED vs West Bengal Dispute on Article 32, PMLA Powers, and ₹2,742 Cr Coal Smuggling Case

PolityCORE
Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCSSC GATeachingPrelims HighMains HighStatic GK Link
18 Mar 2026
~2 min
Source: The Hindu
Key Data:₹2,742 croreArticle 32Article 131March 24, 2026
Bodies:Supreme CourtEnforcement Directorate (ED)West Bengal GovernmentCentral Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
Practice MCQs from today's news ▸
What This Article Covers

1.West Bengal argued before the Supreme Court that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is not a 'person' under Article 32 of the Constitution and thus cannot claim violation of its fundamental rights by a State.

2.The case stems from ED raids at I-PAC offices in Kolkata related to a ₹2,742 crore coal smuggling case, during which Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee allegedly obstructed the investigation.

3.The Supreme Court questioned if the ED would be left 'remediless' and observed that 'law has to evolve according to new situations', highlighting the case's significance for Centre-State relations and agency powers.

The Big Picture
Prelims · HighMains · High

The Supreme Court is hearing a crucial constitutional case where West Bengal argues the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is not a 'person' entitled to fundamental rights under Article 32, challenging the ED's petition against alleged obstruction of its raids by the Chief Minister. This case raises fundamental questions about the scope of central agencies' powers, federalism, and judicial remedies.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

Case Value₹2,742 crore coal smuggling case
Next Hearing DateMarch 24, 2026
Key Constitutional ArticleArticle 32
Key ActPrevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA)
Bench JudgeJustice Prashant Kumar Mishra

1-Minute Revision

  • ›Case Value: ₹2,742 crore coal smuggling case
  • ›Next Hearing Date: March 24, 2026
  • ›Target this Data: ₹2,742 crore (value of the coal smuggling case)
  • ›Target this Nodal Body: Directorate of Enforcement (ED)
  • ›Target this Legal Point: Article 32 (Right to Constitutional Remedies) & Article 131 (Original Jurisdiction of SC)

Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.

Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.

Q1Static LinkageEasy

Under which Ministry does the Enforcement Directorate (ED) function?

Q2Statement-basedHard

Consider the following statements regarding the legal arguments presented in the Supreme Court case concerning ED raids in Kolkata:

1. West Bengal argued that the ED, being a department of the Central government, is not a 'person' entitled to file a writ petition under Article 32.

2. The Solicitor General argued that the Chief Minister's alleged obstruction of the ED's investigation was in the larger public interest.

3. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal contended that an officer of the ED does not have a 'fundamental right' to investigate, as the power is drawn solely from the PMLA.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMedium

According to the article, what is the estimated value of the coal smuggling case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in relation to the Kolkata I-PAC raids?

Q4Application/ImpactMedium

What was the primary constitutional objection raised by West Bengal against the ED's petition in the Supreme Court?

All 15 MCQs ▸
You finished this topic
Explore Related Topics
Related Current Affairs
Polity Current Affairs

SC Asks if PMLA Adjudicating Authority Can Confirm Attachments Without Judicial Member; Only 60 of 8,851 ED Cases Went to Trial

The Supreme Court questioned whether the PMLA Adjudicating Authority can validly confirm asset attachment orders when sitting without a judicial member, given the massive workload of thousands of cases per tribunal. With ED data showing only 60 of 8,851 cases went to trial, the core issue is whether quasi-judicial functions are being performed properly or merely rubber-stamped.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Orders CBI Probe into Custodial Death, ₹25 Lakh Interim Compensation for 2-Year FIR Delay

The Supreme Court transferred the probe into a 2024 custodial death in Chhattisgarh to the CBI, citing a two-year delay by state police in filing the FIR. It also awarded ₹25 lakh interim compensation to the family, highlighting judicial oversight on police accountability and custodial violence.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Revises Interim Stay, Preserves Allahabad HC Quashing of NSA Detention Under Article 21

The Supreme Court revised its September 23 interim order, restricting the stay to only certain strictures and costs against the Noida DM, thereby preserving the Allahabad High Court's landmark quashing of a DU student's NSA detention. The case also raises serious questions about the SC's roster system and 'out-of-turn' listing, making it a critical study point for judicial review, preventive detention safeguards, and constitutional procedures.

Polity Current Affairs

Govt to SC: Only Parliament Can Extend Creamy Layer to SC/ST; Cites Article 341, E V Chinnaiah Case

The government has told the Supreme Court that extending the creamy layer principle to SC/ST is a policy decision for Parliament alone. This reaffirms that reservation for SC/ST is based on historical social criteria, not just economic status, and the creamy layer concept currently applies only to OBCs.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognisance of Delhi-NCR Sexual Assaults, Cites Article 21 and Nirbhaya Parallel

The Supreme Court has taken suo motu cognisance of recent sexual assault cases in Delhi-NCR, flagging lax patrolling and administrative failures that make public spaces 'zones of high risk'. The court invoked Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) and drew a painful parallel to the 2012 Nirbhaya case, demanding accountability and a measurable response from authorities. This has major implications for law enforcement accountability, women's safety, and judicial oversight.

Polity Current Affairs

Patna HC Rules Religious Freedom Under Article 25 Subject to Public Order and Morality

Patna High Court holds that the right to profess and practise religion under Article 25 is not absolute and can be restricted for public order, morality, and health. This reiterates the essential religious practices doctrine and clarifies that constitutional protection does not extend to every mode of exercise. A plea for 300 devotees in a religious procession in Siwan, Bihar, was dismissed citing past law-and-order incidents.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Uses Article 142 to Quash NEET FIRs; PM at SCO Demands Action on Terror Financing

Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to quash all NEET protest FIRs, showcasing its plenary powers. PM Modi at the SCO summit called for united action against state-sponsored terrorism, indirectly targeting Pakistan. Other key updates include bank unions striking over PLI and 5-day week, totaliser debate, and India's tunnel rescue in Nepal.

Polity Current Affairs

Article 124(3) Provision for 'Distinguished Jurist' as Supreme Court Judge Remains Unused Since 1950

Article 124(3) of the Constitution allows appointment of a 'distinguished jurist' as a Supreme Court judge, but this provision has never been invoked in 76 years. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan recently questioned this non-use, highlighting the lost opportunity for legal academics to contribute to the judiciary. This is a key constitutional issue for UPSC with potential for both prelims facts and mains analysis.