Janjivan Bureau / New Delhi : The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s petition challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in a money-laundering case linked to the Delhi excise policy ‘scam’.
“Material collected by the ED reveals that Kejriwal conspired and was involved in formulation of the excise policy and used the proceeds of the crime. He is also allegedly involved in his personal capacity in formulation of the policy and demanding kickbacks in the capacity of national convenor of AAP,’ said Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, dismissing Kejriwal’s petition.
“Courts are concerned with constitutional morality and not political morality,” Justice Sharma said, adding it has to apply the law as it existed.
Rejecting Kejriwal’s arguments that the probe agency could have visited his residence to record his statement, the Bench said investigation can’t be conducted at the convenience of the accused,
It said there can’t be two categories of laws – one for the common citizens and the other for either a Chief Minister or any person in power.
At the very outset Justice Sharma—who had reserved her verdict on Kejriwal’s petition on April 3 after hearing arguments from senior counsel AM Singhvi for Kejriwal and Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who represented the ED—clarified that Kejriwal’s petition was not for bail and that it was challenging his arrest by the ED.
Justice Sharma rejected Kejriwal’s arguments regarding timing of his arrest, saying “The court has to examine his arrest and remand as per law irrespective of timing of elections.”
The court said Kejriwal’s challenge to his arrest was not sustainable in the absence of any mala fide on part of ED.
The court relied on the statements of witnesses and approvers to uphold his arrest and remand to be “legal”.
The Bench took exception to Kejriwal’s arguments that cast aspersions of the statements of approvers, saying the statements were recorded by courts as per laws that have existed much before the parties and even the judge in the cases were born and have been upheld by the top court.
The ED had arrested Kejriwal on March 21 after the Delhi High Court refused to grant him protection from coercive action by the probe agency in the money laundering case. On April 1, a Delhi Special Court sent Kejriwal to 14-day judicial custody till April 15 on the expiry of his ED custody.
Detailed judgment would be uploaded on the high court’s website later this evening, the judge said.
Singhvi had questioned the timing and necessity of the Delhi Chief Minister’s arrest, saying it went against the basic structure of the Constitution, which included free and fair elections that required a level playing field for all political parties during the democratic exercise.
However, the Additional Solicitor General had contested Singhvi’s submissions, contending that the offence of money-laundering was prima facie made out and that the investigation against Kejriwal was at a nascent stage.
Raju said that the accused can’t cite the Lok Sabha elections or his position as Delhi Chief Minister to claim any special exception in the money-laundering case. “Everybody has to be treated equally and someone who looted the country can’t claim immunity citing upcoming elections,” he submitted.
Denying allegations of bias levelled against the probe agency, Raju had asserted that the case was based on evidence and that “criminals are supposed to be arrested and put in jail”.
“Aam aadmi (common man) has to go behind bars if he has committed a crime but because you are a Chief Minister you can’t be arrested? You will loot the country but no one can touch you because elections are coming… .” the ASG wondered.
As Raju gave the example of a terrorist-politician who blew up an Army vehicle and then said ‘no one can touch me’ as he was contesting elections, Singhvi took strong exception to it, terming it bizarre.
“This is nothing but a bizarre example… My point is if a man, a Chief Minister, blows up an Army vehicle he should be arrested. But is that a fair analogy?” Singhvi had asked.
“There is no evidence against him (Kejriwal) that he is involved in the offence of money-laundering. It is preposterous to say that the Chief Minister of Delhi will be handling hawala transactions, “Singhvi had said, adding there was no recovery of money and that the money trail had not been established.
However, the Additional Solicitor General said, “We have demonstrated that Arvind Kejriwal was responsible for the affairs of the company (AAP) at the time when the offence of money laundering was committed. Tomorrow, if we feel that others were also responsible for it, we will make them responsible as well.”
Raju had also pointed out that the petition has only assailed the first remand order which sent Kejriwal to the ED’s custody till March 28, and not the subsequent orders.
The case related to alleged corruption and money laundering in formulating and executing the Delhi Government’s excise policy 2021-22 that was scrapped after allegations of scam.
On March 27, the court had refused to grant interim relief to Kejriwal, saying the matter raised important issues that cannot be “summarily” decided without hearing from the probe agency.
In its response, the ED alleged that Kejriwal was the kingpin and the key conspirator of the excise scam and there were reasons to believe on the basis of material in its possession that the AAP leader was guilty of the offence of money laundering.
