Today, On 30th November, The Enforcement Directorate (ED) submitted its sanction in a CBI case, extending its scope to cover offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). In response, a court dismissed Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea challenging the investigation. The court ruled the sanction valid, affirming the ED’s jurisdiction in the matter.
New Delhi: The Rouse Avenue Court informed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) that the sanction obtained in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) case is sufficiently broad to encompass offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as well as other potential offenses arising from the same facts.
This statement made in response to a plea from former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who asserted that he had not received a copy of the sanction order related to the ED case against him.
In his plea, Kejriwal referenced a recent hearing in the Delhi High Court, where the Solicitor General for the ED indicated that the necessary sanction had been secured at the time the chargesheet was filed.
The ED’s Special Counsel, Zoheb Hossain, clarified that the sanction from the CBI case was comprehensive enough to cover not only the Prevention of Corruption Act but also any other offenses that could emerge from the presented facts, making it adequate for the court to take cognizance of the case.
After reviewing the ED’s submissions, Justice Kaveri Baweja’s bench dismissed Kejriwal’s plea. Kejriwal’s attorney, Advocate Mudit Jain, previously stated that the documents submitted along with the chargesheet did not include a copy of the required sanction.
On November 21, 2024, the Delhi High Court issued a notice regarding Kejriwal’s challenge to the trial court’s decision to take cognizance of the ED’s chargesheet in the alleged excise policy scam.
However, Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri’s bench did not grant a stay on the trial proceedings at that time, scheduling the matter for a hearing on December 20, 2024, to consider arguments on both the stay application and the plea for quashing the trial court’s order.
The Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, representing the ED, opposed Kejriwal’s plea, asserting that proper sanction had been obtained when the prosecution complaint (chargesheet) was filed. Kejriwal is currently out on bail concerning both the ED and CBI cases linked to the now-repealed excise policy.
Read Also: AAP Moves Court || Kejriwal Deserves a Delhi Home as National Party Leader, Says Counsel
The ED alleges that the Excise Policy was intentionally designed with loopholes to benefit Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders and facilitate cartel formations. They accuse AAP leaders of accepting kickbacks from liquor businesses in exchange for preferential treatment, which included discounts, waivers on license fees, and relief during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Moreover, the ED claims that the “scam” involved granting wholesale liquor distribution rights to private entities with a fixed margin of 12%, in return for a 6% kickback, and that AAP leaders influenced election outcomes in Punjab and Goa in early 2022.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
