Supreme Court to continue hearing tomorrow Delhi CM’s plea against ED arrest

Kejriwal’s lawyer informs the Bench that he would require at least an hour to conclude his submissions. The Bench adjourns the hearing. The matter will be taken up again tomorrow. 

Asserting that the denial of interim protection by a court cannot be a ground for arrest, Singhvi says – “ I (Kejriwal) have a right to make legal mistakes. I was arrested the day I was unable to get interim protection from Delhi High Court. The ground for arrest should be positive and culpatory, not because I was unable to get interim protection.”

“ED’s power to summon under Section 50 of the PMLA does not include power to arrest under Section 19”, he adds. 

“You came to my house spent 10 hours to question me and then arrest me. Could you not have come to take my statement? From October 2023 to March 2024, you sent me summons. My question is where is the material revealing ground for arresting me?”, Kejriwal’s lawyer contends. 

Justice Khanna points out that summons issued by the ED were ignored by the Chief Minister. 

“I (Kejriwal) went when CBI called. I replied to ED notices in detail. I said I was not going to come. But today, you cannot arrest by saying you did not come so we arrested”, Singhvi responds. 

“It is my right not to go... that cannot be a ground for arrest”, he adds. 

Also Read: ​​​​Kejriwal skips eighth summons of ED, agrees to appear after March 12 virtually​​​​

Mr. Singhvi says that the case rests on statements made by co-accused persons. However, such statements must be corroborated, he asserts. 

“What was the necessity to arrest? This was not a hardened criminal or a terrorist”, he adds. 

Justice Khanna summarises the intent of Singhvi’s submissions – “i.e. there should be an objective consideration of favourable and unfavourable factors before arrest. The authority should apply its mind to both factors.”

Singhvi underscores that the cardinal principle in criminal law is to let a hundred guilty people go free but not let one innocent person be punished. 

Singhvi relies on the Supreme Court’s judgment denying bail to former Deputy CM Manish Sisodia to point out that no new incriminating material has been advanced by the ED since then. 

Singhvi contends that approver Sarath Reddy bought electoral bonds. “Nine times Sarath Reddy had denied any involvement by Kejriwal”, he adds. 

Also Read: ​​Many pharma companies that bought electoral bonds faced regulatory actions ​​

While flagging that he is not bringing politics to court, Mr. Singhvi points out that persons who have turned approvers in the case have family members who have joined the ruling party at the Centre. 

Also Read: ​​​Magunta Sreenivasulu Reddy and his son Raghava meet JSP chief Pawan Kalyan​​​

[Raghav Magunta Reddy, son of YSR Congress Party Lok Sabha MP Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy and Delhi-based businessman Dinesh Arora ​​​have turned approvers​​​ in the money laundering case linked to Delhi excise policy case being investigated by the ED]. 

ASG SV Raju says what Mr. Singhvi is saying is factually wrong. 

Mr. Singhvi asserts that under the PMLA, while there is an enhanced standard for getting bail, there is also an enhanced standard for arresting someone. He refers to the Supreme Court’s judgment in ​​​Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary v. Union of India ​​​(2022). 

“The power to arrest is not an obligation to arrest. Where are the reasons, the material to entertain a reasonable belief of my guilt? My arrest after the Model Code of Conduct. What is the basis of my arrest? Ten documents, 15 statements of star witnesses, all have nothing against me”, he adds. 

Justice Khanna interrupts Mr. Singhvi’s submissions and asks – “Why don’t you argue on the reasons for granting you bail?”

“These are all reasons. No statements against me”, Mr. Singhvi responds. 

Mr. Singhvi argues, “Prior documents before FIR/ECIR don’t connect me to any of these allegations. Three CBI chargesheets were filed. I am not named. ECIR does not name me. These documents span a period of 1.5 years. Five ED prosecution complaints are filed. I am not named...None of the people implicate me.” 

He further points out that even star witnesses such as Sarath Reddy did not implicate the Chief Minister initially in their statements. 

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju appearing on behalf of the ED points out that no plea has been filed opposing subsequent custody of the Chief Minister. He is currently in judicial remand till May 7. 

The ED says that the Chief Minister has been remanded five times. The first two times from March 21 to April 1 were in ED custody. The remaining three times were in judicial custody.

SC clarifies that the plea by Kejriwal was against arrest and remand. 

Mr. Singhvi appearing for the Chief Minister says that the arrest is illegal under Section 19 of the PMLA.

Justice Khanna asks Mr. Singhvi whether he had sought bail in the trial court. The judge says that he is asking merely out of curiosity. 

Mr. Singhvi replies in the negative. 

The matter has been taken up for hearing. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi is appearing for Mr. Kejriwal. 

A Bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta will take up Mr. Kejriwal’s petition for hearing shortly. The Bench is hearing item number 46 currently. The Delhi CM’s plea is listed as item number 53. 

Sunita Kejriwal, Mr. Kejriwal’s wife, while campaigning for the AAP’s East Delhi candidate Kuldeep Kumar, said her husband had been jailed because he had built schools, provided free electricity, and opened Mohalla clinics. 

“We will vote to remove dictatorship and save democracy,” she said, adding, “Your CM is asher[tiger]; nobody can break him or make him bow down.”Read more

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s wife Sunita has been granted permission by the Tihar jail administration to meet him and will visit him later on April 29, the AAP said on Monday.

“Sunita Kejriwal will be meeting the chief minister at 12.30 pm. She will be accompanied by Delhi Cabinet minister Atishi during the meeting,” the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) said.

On Sunday, the AAP had said that the jail authorities had denied her permission to meet the chief minister, a charge refuted by the prison authorities.

- PTI

For the majority of the tenure of independent India, the phrase “common man” evoked only one image for most Indians — a bespectacled dhoti-and-plaid-coat-clad old man with a startled expression conveying shock at the state of the new republic. The image emerged from cartoonist R.K. Laxman’s pencil. 

In the past decade or so, the common man has found a new icon in the form of Arvind Kejriwal, the raison d’etre of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) or the Common Man’s Party.

The two — the image and the man — have several similarities. At a superficial level they look alike. Mr. Kejriwal, with his short stature, dressed in loose shirts and ill-fitting trousers, carrying around a battle-weary expression, is the average Indian man. And much like Laxman’s common man, he established himself in the nation’s conscience as an anti-corruption crusader. The similarities end here, however. Laxman’s image was that of a mute spectator, almost a fence-sitter who ruminates over the ills of the nation. In sharp contrast, Mr. Kejriwal emerged as an insurrectionist, who wanted to bring down the existing political system to build it anew.

The irony wasn’t lost on any one. Mr. Kejriwal, who painted the political class in broad strokes with his enunciation in 2011 & 2012 — ‘Sab mile hue hai’ (Everyone is in cahoots) and ‘Sab Chor Hai’ (Everyone is a thief) — finds himself under investigations by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case.

The Delhi High Court on April 22 dismissed a fresh petition, filed by a law student, seeking “extraordinary interim bail” for Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal with a cost of ₹75,000.

The high court said the petitioner, who claimed to represent the people of India, lacked “locus standi” to approach the court on behalf of Mr. Kejriwal, who was arrested in connection with a money laundering case linked to the now-scrapped Delhi excise policy.

Read more here. 

The Supreme Court did not offer any interim relief to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and listed the case for hearing in the week commencing April 29. 

Read The Hindu’s live coverage of the proceedings here. 

The Central agency said that the arrest of Mr. Kejriwal was based on material evidence which indicated that the Chief Minister was guilty of money laundering. “A differential treatment in favour of a politician who is guilty of the offence of money laundering would violate the rule of law, which would be a violation of the basic structure of the Constitution,” the ED noted.

Read more here. 

Arrest of criminal politicians does not affect free elections: ED

Enforcement Directorate defends arrest of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, denies political motives amid election accusations.

The Aam Aadmi Party has maintained that the real intention behind the arrest of its national convenor, Mr. Kejriwal, on March 21 was to prevent him from campaigning during the ongoing general election. The party had claimed that the ED had not uncovered even a shred of evidence against Mr. Kejriwal, adding that there was no money trail linked to him.

Read more here. 

Addressing arguments advanced on behalf of Mr. Kejriwal that the ED does not contain sufficient evidence to justify his arrest under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), the High Court pointed out that the ED has relied upon a host of statements given by approvers and witnesses which prima facie reveal that Mr. Vijay Nair, former AAP communications in-charge, had received kickbacks to the tune of ₹100 crore from the “South Liquor Lobby” on behalf of the Chief Minister.

Read The Hindu’s detailed explainer here. 

Arvind Kejriwal ED case: Why did the Delhi High Court uphold Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest in excise policy case? | Explained

Arvind Kejriwal ED case: The Hindu decodes the key takeaways from the High Court’s ruling dismissing the AAP supremo’s plea challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate

The case arose from a report submitted by Delhi Chief Secretary Naresh Kumar to Lieutenant Governor (LG) Vinai Kumar Saxena in July 2022 alleging that there were procedural lapses in the formulation of the Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22, which came into force in November 2021 but was later scrapped in July 2022. 

The Chief Secretary alleged that kickbacks received by the Aam Admi Party (AAP) leaders from operators of alcohol businesses for preferential treatment were used to “influence” the 2022 Assembly elections in Punjab and Goa. Subsequently, the ED claimed that the scam involved giving wholesale liquor businesses to private entities with a fixed margin of 12% for a 6% kickback.

Contending that Mr. Kejriwal was the “kingpin and key conspirator” of the scam, the central agency in its remand application said that the excise policy was drafted “considering the favours to be granted to the South Group” — a group of influential persons from South India who purportedly secured undue favours to establish wholesale businesses and paid the political party Rs. 100 crore in return. On March 15, K Kavitha, Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader and daughter of former Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao, was arrested for allegedly being part of this group. After her arrest, the ED for the first time alleged that Mr. Kejriwal was also a conspirator in the case.

The Tihar Jail administration has denied Sunita Kejriwal permission to meet her husband and Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, an Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) source said on April 28.

Reacting to it, a senior jail official said they did not deny her the permission.

“In the coming week, Delhi Minister Atishi is scheduled to meet the CM on April 29 and Punjab’s CM Bhagwant Mann on April 30. A prisoner is allowed two meetings in a week. Since all meeting slots were booked, we will shift her meeting date to the earliest slot available,” he said.

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has told the Supreme Court that his arrest in the excise policy case is a “classic case” of assault mounted on the Opposition against the tenets of democracy, federalism, and fair elections.

Mr. Kejriwal, in his rejoinder to a counter-affidavit filed by the Directorate of Enforcement’s (ED), accused the BJP-ruled Union government of using the agency as a tool to crush its competition in the electoral arena.

Delhi Cabinet Minister Saurabh Bharadwaj on April 28 said that the Aam Aadmi Party is sure that the Supreme Court will allow Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal to campaign in the Lok Sabha polls.

The AAP Leader said that in his affidavit, Mr. Kejriwal has referred to the ED and CBI and said that the job of the investigating agencies is to present the truth before the court. 

“If CBI and ED got 1 lakh pages of documents and 80,000 of them are in favour of Arvind Kejriwal and AAP, then those 80,000 documents were not presented before the court, only those documents which were taken by pressurizing people, by putting them in jail, by luring people with bail, by luring people with pardon, by luring people with ticket to contest elections from NDA, only those testimonies were presented before the court by ED and CBI,” Mr. Bharadwaj said.

- PTI