BREAKING | Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal Remanded to Judicial Custody Until April 15

“What the PM is doing is not good for the country.”: Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal Today in Rouse Avenue Court. Kejriwal has been remanded to judicial custody until April 15 in connection with the liquor policy case. Kejriwal was arrested on March 21 in connection with Delhi excise policy case as ED alleged that he was the kingpin of scam.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

NEW DELHI: Delhi’s Rouse Avenue Court has ordered Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal to judicial custody until April 15. Special Judge (PC Act) Kaveri Baweja issued the directive, marking a significant step in the legal proceedings surrounding the case.

Arvind Kejriwal’s legal team filed an application requesting permission for him to read three books during his custody: the Bhagavad Gita, Ramayan, and How Prime Ministers Decide. This request underscores Kejriwal’s desire to utilize his time constructively despite the legal constraints he faces.

 “What the PM (Narendra Modi) is doing is not good for the country,”

-Arvind Kejriwal said while being brought to the Rouse Avenue Court.

Kejriwal’s arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on March 21 stemmed from allegations of being the “key conspirator” in a money laundering case linked to the excise policy. His plea for interim protection from arrest was dismissed by the Delhi High Court shortly before his arrest, leading to his detention.

Initially remanded to ED custody until March 28, Kejriwal’s detention was subsequently extended. During his appearance in court, the ED asserted that Kejriwal had not been cooperating with the investigation, alleging non-cooperation and attempts to mislead interrogators. The issue of his phone password also arose during the proceedings, reflecting the contentious nature of the case.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, appearing for ED, said that the CM was not cooperating with the probe.

“Arvind Kejriwal’s conduct has been totally non cooperative and he has tried to mislead the interrogation. He said Vijay Nair does not report to me but to Atishi. Kejriwal is not sharing the password for his phone,” it was argued.

“How far are these arguments relevant to the application for Judicial Custody,” the Court asked.

“We reserve the right to seek his ED custody at a later stage,” the ASG replied.

The arrest of a sitting Chief Minister while in office is unprecedented in India, marking a significant moment in the country’s political and legal landscape. Kejriwal’s detention has sparked multiple rounds of litigation, including proceedings before the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court, as well as hearings at the trial court in the Rouse Avenue Court complex.

Legal battles to secure Kejriwal’s release commenced immediately after his arrest, with a plea filed before the Supreme Court followed by proceedings in the trial court. Despite efforts to challenge his arrest and subsequent remand, the Delhi High Court declined to grant interim relief, setting the stage for further legal deliberations.

The complexity and significance of the case underscore the broader implications of governmental accountability and legal procedure within the Indian political context. As the legal proceedings unfold, they are likely to continue drawing attention and scrutiny both nationally and internationally.

BACKGROUND

Earlier, Special Judge Kaveri Baweja extensively reviewed the submissions and arguments presented by both the investigative agency and the defense in the case involving Chief Minister Kejriwal. The court found compelling reasons to authorize extended custodial interrogation of Kejriwal, emphasizing the necessity for him to be confronted with the accumulated evidence and witness statements obtained during the investigation.

This decision was notably influenced by the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) argument that Kejriwal needed to be challenged with information retrieved from digital devices among other evidentiary materials.

In its fresh remand plea before the Rouse Avenue court, the federal probe agency said Kejriwal’s statements were recorded over five days but he was “evasive” in his response.

Judge Baweja, in her ruling, underscored the ED’s request for an extension of custodial interrogation to allow for a more thorough and sustained questioning process, leading to the extension of Kejriwal’s ED custody until April 1.

“Having considered the submission made before this court and considering the grounds as cited by the investigative agency, there appears to be sufficient reasons to permit further custodial interrogation, particularly keeping in view the submissions that he (Kejriwal) is required to be confronted with the material collected and statements recorded so far in the course of the investigation,”

-special judge Kaveri Baweja said.

The court observed Kejriwal’s verbal commitment to cooperate with the investigating agency and his lack of opposition to the remand extension request. However, Kejriwal raised concerns during the proceedings, asserting that the witness statements compiled by the ED failed to link him to the alleged offenses and questioning the basis of his arrest.

“On perusal of the statements recorded in the course of the investigation and in view of the fact that extension of custodial interrogation of the accused has been sought for further sustained and detailed interrogation, the ED custody of the accused (Kejriwal) is hereby extended till April 1,”

–the court said.

Furthermore, Kejriwal criticized the ED for allegedly withholding documents that could potentially favor his case, including evidence that could challenge the ED’s claim of him receiving Rs 100 crores in “kickbacks.” He also highlighted a particular instance where a witness reportedly made a significant donation to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), suggesting potential biases in the investigation.

“He further submitted in the open court during the proceedings that statements of witnesses recorded by the investigating agency do not in any manner connect him with the alleged offences and questioned his arrest in the matter,”

-the court noted.

“Accused (Kejriwal) has further submitted that one of the witnesses had donated a large sum of money to the BJP,”

-the court further noted.

On the other hand, the ED’s counsel, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, dismissed Kejriwal’s statements as irrelevant to the current phase of the investigation, focusing instead on the lack of merit in Kejriwal’s accusations regarding the nondisclosure of exculpatory evidence. Raju emphasized the existence of ample evidence delineating the money trail linked to the alleged kickbacks and its utilization by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in the 2021-22 Goa assembly elections.

“He (ASG) further submitted that there is also no merit in the submissions that the ED has not placed on record the material favouring the accused and questioned as to how the accused has knowledge about documents in the custody of ED,”

-the court said.

Senior Advocate Ramesh Gupta, representing Kejriwal, reiterated his client’s willingness to cooperate with the investigation. Nonetheless, he challenged the ED’s basis for seeking Kejriwal’s remand, pointing out that the adequacy of the grounds for arrest was still under judicial review by the Delhi High Court.

“In so far as the submissions with respect to there not being sufficient grounds for arrest of the accused are concerned, the said matter is admittedly subjudice before the Delhi High Court in a petition wherein the accused has challenged the grounds of his arrest,”

-the court concluded.

This judicial proceeding encapsulates the complexity of legal arguments and evidentiary challenges in high-profile cases, highlighting the delicate balance between investigative diligence and the rights of the accused.

Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Arvind Kejriwal

Click Here to Read Previous Reports of Delhi Excise Policy Scam

FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES