ED vs IPAC: How Serious is the 'Shadow War' in Bengal?

Kolkata: The Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) recent raids on the Kolkata office of the Indian Political Action Committee (IPAC), a political consultancy firm, and the residence and office of its director Prateek Jain, have opened up political and institutional fault lines that go far beyond one firm or one investigation.

What is unfolding in West Bengal is a murky shadow war—between a Central agency (ED), whose credibility is increasingly being questioned, a ruling party in the state accused of institutionalising political patronage, and a political consultancy firm that epitomises the deepening corporatisation of Indian democracy.

The ED action has triggered sharp reactions not only from the Trinamool Congress (TMC) and IPAC, but also from the Left, which sees the episode as a “symptom of a larger democratic decay—where money power, political management firms and pliable investigative agencies together hollow out the electoral process.”

IPAC: From Election Strategy to Political Power Centre

Founded in 2008 by political strategist Prashant Kishor and Prateek Jain, IPAC has been at the forefront of introducing corporate-style election management into Indian politics. It is alleged to have replaced cadre-based political work with data analytics, booth-level micro-targeting, professional messaging, and centralised command structures.

Over the years, the consultancy firm has worked with almost every major political formation—Bharatiya Janata Party, Congress, Aam Aadmi Party, Trinamool Congress, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, YSR Cogress, Bharath Rashtra Samith, Janata Dal (United) and Shiv Sena. This cross-ideological clientele has allowed IPAC to project itself as a “neutral professional consultancy.” Yet, critics argue that such neutrality is illusory in a political system where funding sources, access to power and ideological compromises are deeply entangled.

Following the ED raid, IPAC issued a statement terming the searches “unfortunate” and warning that they set a “dangerous precedent” for professional organisations. It stressed that it had “cooperated fully” with investigators.

But the ED’s allegations are serious—and politically explosive.

The ED Case: Hawala, Coal and Consulting Fees

According to the ED, the searches are linked to a money laundering investigation arising from a 2020 CBI FIR related to an alleged coal smuggling syndicate led by Anup Majee. The agency claims that coal was illegally extracted from Eastern Coalfields Limited (ECL) areas and sold to factories across West Bengal, with proceeds routed through hawala channels.

The ED has now alleged that tens of crores of rupees generated through this illegal trade were transferred to IPAC through hawala operators. If substantiated, this would imply that proceeds of organised crime entered the formal political consultancy ecosystem.

However, the agency’s handling of the case raises uncomfortable questions.

The ECIR (Enforcement Case Information Report) was registered in 2020, yet no visible action was taken against IPAC or its directors for nearly five years. Prashant Kishor, the most prominent face of the organisation during the relevant period, was never questioned. Instead, the raid targeted Prateek Jain, who formally took over the reins in 2023. No prior summons or notice to Jain were publicly known.

Critics point out that this “selective and delayed” action fits into a broader pattern that has plagued the ED—where investigations appear episodic, politically timed, and rarely result in convictions.

ED’s Credibility Crisis

The Left has been unequivocal in its criticism of the ED. Communist Party of India (Marxist) leaders in West Bengal argue that the agency has become “an instrument of political pressure rather than a tool for justice.” They point to low conviction rates under the PMLA (Prevention of Money laundering Act) and the routine use of raids and arrests as political signals rather than investigative conclusions.

“The ED raids selectively, leaks selectively, and prosecutes selectively,” said a senior CPI(M) leader. “This weakens the fight against corruption instead of strengthening it.”

At the same time, the Left has also warned against allowing this critique to become a shield for the ruling TMC.

TMC and the Politics of Impunity

What has further complicated the episode is Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s intervention during the ED raid. According to multiple accounts, the Chief Minister visited the IPAC office while the search was ongoing and left with some documents and electronic devices—without any legal consequence.

For the Left, this episode highlights the “culture of impunity” enjoyed by the ruling party in West Bengal. “If a Chief Minister can walk into an ongoing ED raid and walk out without consequence, it shows the collapse of institutional norms,” said a Left Front leader.

The incident also revived memories of February 2019, when Banerjee sat on a dharna against a CBI raid at the residence of then Kolkata Police Commissioner Rajeev Kumar. Despite openly obstructing a Central investigation, no punitive action followed. Critics argue that this failure to enforce accountability had emboldened the TMC leadership.

“My IT Cell Chief”: A Telling Admission

Perhaps the most revealing moment came when Banerjee reportedly referred to Prateek Jain as the “in-charge of my IT cell” and allegedly described IPAC’s Kolkata office as a “branch office” of TMC.

For the Left, this statement inadvertently exposed the depth of corporatisation within the ruling TMC. “If a private corporate consultancy effectively runs a party’s IT and organisational machinery, then the party has ceased to be a mass political organisation,” said a CPI(M) functionary.

The remark has also raised some legal and ethical questions. If IPAC allegedly functioned as an “extension of TMC”, how were payments structured? Were party funds routed through corporate contracts? Were election expenditures disclosed transparently? All these questions need answers.

The Left’s Core Critique

The Left argues that the ED vs IPAC controversy in Bengal must be seen within a larger structural shift in Indian politics. Elections are increasingly dominated by money, professional consultants and data firms, while ideological debates, mass movements and cadre-based mobilisation are sidelined.

“In West Bengal, politics has been reduced to a corporate operation managed by consultants and funded by opaque money flows,” said a Left economist, adding “This is not democracy—it is electoral management.”

From this perspective, both ED and TMC are complicit, say Left leaders. The ED, by acting selectively, allows corruption to become a political bargaining chip rather than a crime. The TMC, by relying on corporate consultancies and tolerating—or benefiting from—illegal fund flows, deepens the rot.

A ‘Manufactured’ Conflict?

Some political analysts also believe that the ED-IPAC clash was less a genuine confrontation and more a “managed conflict”. Despite the dramatic raids and allegations, neither side appears eager to push matters to a logical conclusion, they allege. The ED has not clarified why key figures were spared earlier. The TMC has not explained its financial relationship with IPAC. And IPAC continues to present itself as a neutral professional body despite “clear political entanglements.”

This ambiguity, the Left argues, serves the purpose of all the powerful actors—while ordinary citizens are left questioning.

Democracy as the Casualty

Overall, the “shadow war” between ED and IPAC reveals a deeper crisis of Indian democracy. Institutions meant to uphold the law appear politicised. Ruling parties operate with impunity. Corporate entities shape political outcomes without public accountability.

The Left parties say their position is clear: corruption cannot be fought by compromised agencies, and democracy cannot survive when politics is outsourced to corporate consultants funded by opaque money.

Unless there is transparency in political funding, independence of investigative agencies, and a return to people-centric politics, such controversies will keep erupting—loud in spectacle, but hollow in outcome.

The ED vs IPAC episode, therefore, should not be seen as an aberration. It is a warning sign.