Totally Violating Federal Structure Of The Country: SC Slams ED On TASMAC Raids

The Supreme Court on Thursday slammed the Enforcement Directorate in connection with the raids on the premises of the TASMAC, a state-run corporation responsible for liquor sales in Tamil Nadu, saying that its action violates the federal structure of the country.

The apex court, which was hearing petitions filed by the Tamil Nadu government and TASMAC challenging the Madras High Court's rejection of their plea against the ED's searches at TASMAC's headquarters, has stayed the ongoing investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) into TASMAC. The stay was granted in response to a plea filed by the Tamil Nadu government challenging the ED's raids on TASMAC premises, according to a report in Live Law.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai said, "Your ED is crossing all limits. How can there be the offence against the corporation?"

State's Stand: FIRs Already Filed, ED Overreach Alleged

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Tamil Nadu, informed the apex court that the state government had already filed 41 FIRs against illegal liquor operators between 2014 and 2021. However, the central agency entered the picture only in 2025, raiding TASMAC's headquarters, seizing officials' phones, and cloning data.

CJI Gavai questioned ASG Raju on how the offence was made out against TASMAC itself: "You may register against the individuals, but against the corporation a criminal matter? Your ED is crossing all limits, Mr. Raju"

Privacy Concerns & Interim Stay

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for TASMAC, highlighted privacy violations, stating the ED had cloned officials' phones. Sibal urged the court to restrain the ED from using the seized data, calling it a "breach of privacy." The CJI, however, noted that interim relief had already been granted and declined further directions.

ED's Defence: Alleged ₹1,000 Crore Scam

ASG Raju claimed the ED was probing a ₹1,000 crore fraud, alleging politicians were being shielded. The CJI countered, pointing out that the state had already taken action: "Why should ED unnecessarily...where is the predicate offence?"

Reiterating his stance, CJI Gavai said the ED was "violating federal principles," while ASG Raju denied overreach and sought time to file a detailed reply.