A Delhi court observed in its order of June 20 granting bail to Kejriwal that ED is acting with bias against Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal in the money laundering case registered against him in connection with the Excise policy matter.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal in a money laundering case linked to the contentious Excise policy matter. The court’s decision, delivered on June 20, has cast serious aspersions on the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) handling of the investigation, suggesting potential bias against Kejriwal.
Special Judge Niyay Bindu of the Rouse Avenue Court, in her detailed order, criticized the ED for failing to present any direct evidence connecting Kejriwal to the proceeds of the crime. The court also noted the absence of any proof that another accused, Vijay Nair, was acting on Kejriwal’s behalf.
“The court has to take a pause to consider this argument which is not a potable submission that investigation is an art because if it is so, then, any person can be implicated and kept behind the bars by artistically procuring the material against him after artistically avoiding/withdrawing exculpatory material from the record. This very scenario constrains the court to draw an inference against the investigating agency that it is not acting without bias,”
-the Court observed.
Adding to the ED’s woes, the court highlighted the fact that Kejriwal was not named in the initial reports by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or in the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) filed by the ED.
“It is also an admitted fact that the accused has not been summoned by the Court till date, yet he is lying in judicial custody at the instance of ED on the pretext of investigation being still going on,”
-the order emphasized.
The court also underscored that the allegations against Kejriwal were primarily based on statements made by co-accused individuals.
“ED has not shown anything on record that Vijay Nair was acting on the directions of the applicant (Kejriwal). It has also failed to establish that even if Vinod Chauhan has a close relationship with Charanpreet, how come the same would establish the guilt of applicant even if the applicant is having acquaintance with both these co-accused,”
-the Court stated.
The trial court’s decision on Thursday, which granted bail to Kejriwal, included a requirement for a bail bond of Rs 1 lakh. Although the order was passed on Thursday, the copy was made available only on Friday.
In a swift response, the ED has challenged this order before the Delhi High Court, which is set to hear the matter today. The High Court has temporarily halted Kejriwal’s release from jail.
Kejriwal’s arrest by the ED on March 21 stemmed from allegations that he was part of a conspiracy to exploit loopholes in the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy for 2021-22, benefiting certain liquor sellers.
The ED accused Kejriwal of using kickbacks from liquor sellers to fund AAP’s electoral campaign in Goa, making him both personally and vicariously liable for money laundering. Kejriwal has vehemently denied these allegations, accusing the ED of running an extortion racket.
Other prominent AAP leaders, including former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and Member of Parliament Sanjay Singh, were also arrested in connection with the case. Singh is currently out on bail, while Sisodia remains in jail.
In May, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Kejriwal, allowing him to campaign for the Lok Sabha elections. However, Kejriwal returned to jail on June 2 after the interim bail period expired. His subsequent application for interim bail on medical grounds was rejected by the trial court on June 5. The trial court eventually granted him regular bail, prompting the ED to seek redressal from the High Court.
The unfolding legal drama continues to attract national attention, highlighting the intersection of politics and law enforcement in India. As the High Court reviews the ED’s challenge, the case underscores the critical need for impartiality and fairness in legal proceedings, especially when high-profile political figures are involved.
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
