Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal Today (March 14th) appealed to a Delhi sessions court regarding the summons from the additional chief metropolitan magistrate. This comes shortly before his scheduled physical appearance in response to a complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for alleged non-compliance.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi, today initiated legal action by moving to a Delhi sessions court in response to a summons issued by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. This legal maneuver comes as Kejriwal is on the cusp of a mandatory physical appearance before the magisterial court, prompted by allegations of non-compliance raised by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The complaint centers around Kejriwal’s alleged failure to adhere to the ED’s directives, which has escalated the legal scrutiny surrounding him.
Special Judge Rakesh Syal of the Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi is slated to deliberate on Kejriwal’s application. The hearing is set against the backdrop of a directive that mandates Kejriwal’s presence before the magistrate on March 16, underlining the immediacy and gravity of the situation.
The genesis of this legal entanglement can be traced back to the ED’s approach to the magistrate court on two separate occasions, February 3 and March 6. The agency’s complaint sought to initiate legal proceedings against Kejriwal under Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This specific section of the law addresses the consequences faced by individuals who fail to appear before authorities despite receiving official summons, outlining penalties that include imprisonment and fines.
The narrative of non-compliance is further compounded by the ED’s claim of issuing multiple summons to Kejriwal. These summons, aimed at compelling his cooperation with the investigation into the alleged money laundering activities tied to the Delhi excise policy case, span several dates: March 4, February 26, February 19, February 2, January 18, January 3, of this year; December 22, and November 2 of the previous year.
The legal proceedings took a notable turn when Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Divya Malhotra intervened following Kejriwal’s failure to respond to five of these summons. Malhotra’s directive required Kejriwal to make a physical court appearance on February 17. However, Kejriwal, citing commitments to the Delhi budget session and a confidence motion in the legislative house, opted for a video conference appearance instead.
In response to Kejriwal’s appeal, Magistrate Malhotra granted a temporary exemption from physical appearance, postponing the matter to March 16. However, the situation escalated as the ED filed a second complaint following Kejriwal’s absence from three additional summons.
Upon reviewing the second complaint, Magistrate Malhotra issued a fresh directive, mandating Kejriwal’s in-person appearance on March 16. The ED’s complaint against Kejriwal underscores a lack of legal basis for his inquiries about the nature of his summons, accusing him of intentionally avoiding compliance and raising baseless objections.
The ED’s investigation aims to unravel the complexities of the alleged excise policy scam, seeking to identify the roles of various individuals, including Kejriwal, and to trace the financial pathways of the purported illicit activities. This probe into the alleged corruption within the Delhi excise policy for the fiscal year 2021-22 has already led to significant developments, including the arrest of two prominent members of the Aam Aadmi Party, Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh, and the filing of six charge sheets.
Despite the allegations and the inclusion of his name in the ED’s charge sheets, Kejriwal has not been formally accused by either the ED or the Central Bureau of Investigation, which is conducting a parallel investigation into the allegations.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Arvind Kejriwal
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
