Today(on 24th April), Rouse Avenue Court grants Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal two-week extension for rejoinder in the Delhi excise policy case against the ED.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Rouse Avenue Court today(on 24th April), has granted additional time to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal to prepare a rejoinder concerning the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) response to his revisions regarding summons in the Delhi excise policy case.
Special Judge Rakesh Syal, after considering the arguments presented by Kejriwal’s legal team, has allocated a two-week period for filing the necessary legal documents and for further arguments.
The case is set to resume on May 14.
Representing Chief Minister Kejriwal were advocates Rajiv Mohan, Mudit Jain, and Mohd. Irshad, while the ED was represented by special public prosecutors NK Matta and Simon Benjamin. The defense argued that they were unable to receive instructions directly from Kejriwal due to his arrest on March 21 in connection with the same case.
ALSO READ: [BREAKING] Delhi Court Extends Arvind Kejriwal, K Kavitha’s Judicial Custody till May 7
The summons in question stem from complaints by the ED, alleging discrepancies in the Delhi Excise Policy. Kejriwal, currently in custody until May 7, has contested these summons, arguing that the court should reconsider the grounds on which they were issued.
Senior Advocate Ramesh Gupta, defending Kejriwal, stressed that there was no intentional disobedience by the Chief Minister. He highlighted that Kejriwal had responded to each summons, explaining his absences were due to his responsibilities as Chief Minister.
“I have not failed, I mentioned the reasons for not appearing. I went to the CBI office in 2023. The purpose and reasons for calling me personally were not cleared by the ED,”
-Gupta contended.
He further argued that the court did not consider Kejriwal’s explanations related to unavoidable public engagements such as budget preparations, questioning the characterization of these absences as intentional.
Furthermore, Advocate Rajiv Mohan criticized the haste in which the summons were issued, suggesting a lack of judicial discretion.
“The trial court promptly issued summons upon taking cognizance, overlooking Kejriwal’s responses to the ED’s summons,”
– Mohan explained.
He argued that to prosecute under Section 174 CRPC, there needs to be evidence of disobedience and intention, neither of which, he claims, were adequately considered by the trial court.
Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, representing the ED, countered the arguments, asserting that Kejriwal’s compliance should be assessed during the trial. Raju emphasized the legal authority of authorities to issue summons and highlighted Kejriwal’s ability to travel for political activities, contrasting it with his failure to appear at the ED office, which Raju deemed deliberate disobedience.
ALSO READ: Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal Produced Before Special Court Today
The ongoing legal proceedings stem from allegations of financial mismanagement linked to the Delhi liquor policy, which also led to the arrest of Manish Sisodia, the then Deputy Chief Minister, following investigations by the CBI.
The policy was eventually scrapped following directives from Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena after purported irregularities were flagged during the tenure of Saxena’s predecessor, Anil Baijal, which allegedly led to lower-than-expected revenue outcomes.
