The Enforcement Directorate has moved the Delhi High Court after a trial court acquitted AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal of charges related to alleged non-compliance with PMLA summons in the excise policy case, which the agency claims hindered investigation.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) approached the Delhi High Court after a trial court acquitted Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal of charges for not complying with summons issued under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in the excise policy matter.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma will hear the petition on Wednesday, April 1.
In January, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Paras Dalal of the Rouse Avenue Courts acquitted Kejriwal, finding that the ED had not proven beyond reasonable doubt that he willfully disregarded the summons.
The ED filed the challenge in February 2024 over Kejriwal’s alleged failure to respond to summons issued under Section 50 of the PMLA.
Kejriwal had not appeared before the central agency despite being served five separate summons in connection with the investigation into the alleged scam.
The ED’s money-laundering probe arose from a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) FIR lodged on August 17, 2022, concerning purported irregularities in the Delhi Excise Policy for 2021–22.
That CBI FIR was filed following a complaint by Lieutenant Governor V.K. Saxena dated July 20, 2022. The ED opened its money-laundering case against the accused on August 22, 2022.
Kejriwal was later arrested in the primary case and subsequently granted bail by the Supreme Court.
Recently, the trial court discharged all accused in the CBI case.
The matter arose from allegations of corruption linked to the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy 2021–22, introduced by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government.
After a complaint by Delhi Lieutenant Governor V.K. Saxena, the CBI registered an FIR in August 2022 alleging irregularities in the policy’s drafting and implementation. The agency said the policy was tailored to benefit certain private liquor companies, claiming license fees were lowered and profit margins fixed to favour select players.
The CBI further alleged that loopholes were deliberately created after the tendering process to grant undue advantage to particular licensees, that kickbacks were paid, and that the Delhi government suffered financial losses. Based on these claims, 23 people, including Kejriwal and Sisodia, were named as accused.
After weighing the arguments, the Special Court discharged all 23 accused, concluding that no prima facie case had been made against them.
The court found that the evidence presented did not prove a widespread conspiracy or criminal intent underlying the policy’s framing, and that the prosecution failed to reach the threshold necessary to frame charges.
The discharge effectively ends criminal proceedings at the trial-court level unless the decision is challenged in a higher court.
A central feature of the judgment was the court’s assessment of the alleged conspiracy. The court said the CBI’s attempt to build a conspiracy narrative rested on speculation rather than solid evidence.
It found the prosecution’s material insufficient to establish a criminal conspiracy at the policy-formulation stage. Allegations of intentional loopholes and benefits to particular entities were not supported by enough evidence to make out a prima facie case.
Thus, the court concluded that the basic elements required to continue a criminal trial were not met.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Arvind Kejriwal
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
