NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday said it will examine whether the central probe agency, the Enforcement Directorate (ED), is entitled to file writ petitions as a juristic person before state High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution for enforcement of its rights.
A two-judge bench headed by Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, while hearing appeals filed by the governments of Kerala and Tamil Nadu, issued notice to the ED. The appeals challenge a September 26, 2025 order of a two-judge bench of the Kerala High Court which upheld the ED’s locus to file writ petitions under Article 226. The bench said, “We issue notice to the ED on the appeals filed by the governments of Kerala and Tamil Nadu. We will examine the issue.”
The High Court’s division bench had upheld a Single Judge’s interim order staying a state-appointed inquiry commission set up to probe allegations that the ED and other central agencies were falsely implicating political leaders in the state, including Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, in the gold smuggling case.
Initially, the ED had approached the Single Judge challenging the state notification constituting the inquiry commission headed by former High Court judge Justice V.K. Mohanan. The commission was tasked with examining alleged jurisdictional overreach and political bias by central agencies, particularly the ED, in attempting to link the Chief Minister and other state officials to the gold smuggling case.
While granting interim relief, the Single Judge stayed the functioning of the commission and observed that the ED is a statutory body and is therefore entitled to file a writ petition under Article 226. The state government challenged this before the division bench, which upheld the Single Judge’s order, prompting Kerala to move the Supreme Court.
In its appeal, the state argued that the ED is only a department of the Central Government and cannot invoke the writ jurisdiction under Article 226.