In a major observation that may set a precedent for future political cases, the Supreme Court firmly told the Enforcement Directorate (ED) that political battles must be fought among the electorate, not within courtrooms.

The statement came during the hearing of the MUDA (Mysuru Urban Development Authority) land scam case, where the ED had filed a plea seeking to intervene. The apex court not only rejected the ED’s plea but also made sharp remarks questioning whether the agency was being misused for political vendetta.

"Why are you being used like this?" the bench asked directly, suggesting that the ED’s involvement in certain cases might be politically motivated. The court emphasized that investigating agencies should not be seen as instruments of political warfare, especially when elections and party interests are at stake.

This verdict has sparked significant political chatter, particularly among opposition leaders, who have long accused central agencies of selective targeting. Legal experts too believe the court’s observation will echo in future cases involving political figures.

The message was clear: Political differences should be resolved not in the streets of the court, but in the electoral field. The Supreme Court has tried to draw an essential border between law and politics, which further strengthens its role as a fair constitutional body.

As the country is moving towards the upcoming state elections, the decision can give a new shape to the attitude of looking at the role of investigative agencies in politically sensitive cases.