New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed the Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s petition challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the excise policy case.
Clarifying that Kejriwal’s petition was not an application for grant of bail, the court said the plea challenged the arrest of the petitioner and stated that it (the arrest) violated the Section 19 of PMLA.
A single-judge bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said this court is of the opinion that the petitioner has been arrested in money laundering and the courts have to examine his arrest and remand as per law irrespective of elections. Apart from his arrest, Kejriwal has also challenged his subsequent remand in the ED’s custody.
On necessity of arrest the HC said that ED was in possession of enough material which led them to arrest the present accused.
The bench also mentioned that not joining the probe is a contributing factor, but not the only factor behind Kejriwal’s arrest. “This court holds that judges are bound by law and not by political considerations,” the court said, adding that the political considerations and equations cannot be brought to court of law as it is irrelevant. The court also held that the matter is not between the petitioner Kejriwal and the Central government. “The matter is between Kejriwal and the Enforcement Directorate,” the court said.
Justice Sharma said the court is only concerned with upholding constitutional morality. On the timing of arrest and malafide arrest- the petitioner has been arrested in a money laundering case & the courts have to consider the same with regards to the law in the absence of timing of arrest. Kejriwal would have known when LS elections would be declared and he would then have been very busy & thus some observations that… court says that it cannot be held that the arrest timing was decided by ED.”
‘ED had sufficient evidence for CM’s arrest,’ said the Delhi HC. The question on non supply of documents — court states that he would be entitled to the same at the stage of Section 207 CrPC, the stage which has not come yet.
“MS Reddy & Sarath Reddy have given their statement out of free will. This court cannot step into the shoes of trial court & conduct a mini trial. ED was in possession of enough material which had led them to arrest the accused. Delay caused by Kejriwal also impacted those who were in custody. Non-joining of Kejriwal was a contributory factor & not the only factor” the court said.
“The law of approver is more than 100 years old. It is not a one year old law to suggest as if it was enacted to falsely implicate the petitioner. On the question of non supply of documents and earlier statements (of approvers), I’ve said that you’re entitled to inspect documents at the appropriate stage of trial. However, this is not the stage.”
On April 1, the Rouse Avenue Court sent him to judicial custody till April 15.
Kejriwal was arrested in the excise policy case late on March 21 after months of skipping summons by the ED. A 12-member team of the central agency had arrived at his home hours after the Delhi High Court declined to grant him interim protection from coercive action.
The ED said in court that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief was the “kingpin and key conspirator of the Delhi excise scam”. Kejriwal, the ED said in its remand application, “was involved in the conspiracy…to favour certain persons and…in the demanding kickbacks from liquor businessmen in exchange of favours”.
He was also “involved in the use of proceeds of crime…in the Goa election campaign of the AAP of which he is the…ultimate decision maker”, the ED said.
