The Supreme Court set to hear Arvind Kejriwal’s plea against possible arrest on Monday, April 29th. The plea is related to a defamation case filed by a former Delhi Development Authority (DDA) vice-chairman. Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi, seeks protection from arrest in connection to the case. The hearing will likely address important legal questions regarding freedom of speech and defamation laws in India.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court is set to consider a petition from Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi, on Monday, regarding his detention in connection with a money laundering case linked to the purported excise policy scam. Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta are expected to oversee the hearing. Previously, Kejriwal addressed the Supreme Court, asserting that his arrest was unlawful and represented a significant violation of democratic principles, emphasizing the importance of “free and fair elections” and “federalism.” He argues that his detainment undermines these critical foundations of democracy.
In his response to the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) counter-affidavit regarding his petition against his arrest, Arvind Kejriwal highlighted the circumstances surrounding his detention. He pointed out that his arrest occurred just prior to the Lok Sabha elections, at a time when the Model Code of Conduct already in effect. According to Kejriwal, the timing, method, and manner of his arrest significantly demonstrate the “arbitrariness” of the Enforcement Directorate‘s actions.
He suggests that these aspects of his arrest reveal a lack of fairness and reasonableness in the agency’s approach.
Read Also:BREAKING|| Arvind Kejriwal Scam | Delhi Court Summons Chief Minister
Kejriwal argued that his situation exemplifies a blatant misuse of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) by the central government, utilizing the extensive powers granted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act to systematically “crush” both him and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). He emphasized that this abuse of authority by the ED involved the unlawful apprehension of a currently serving Chief Minister and the national leader of a major opposition party. This occurred just five days following the announcement of the general elections, at a time when the Model Code of Conduct already been implemented. Kejriwal expressed concern that his wrongful arrest disrupts the essential balance required for “free and fair elections,” thereby undermining the democratic electoral process.
In a detailed rebuttal, the defense for Arvind Kejriwal argued that the fairness requisite for “free and fair elections” unduly compromised by his purportedly unlawful arrest.
The defense highlighted,
“A level playing field, a pre-requisite for ‘free and fair elections’, has clearly been compromised.”
They pointed out that the basis for Kejriwal’s detention primarily revolves around “self-incriminating confessions” from alleged accomplices, who received immunity through pardons. The defense questioned the sufficiency of such evidence for determining guilt under section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), particularly given Kejriwal’s positions as the Chief Minister of the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi and a national convenor of a major political party during general elections.
Further, in his rejoinder, Kejriwal asserted that the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) sole aim was to extract incriminating statements against him, ceasing further action once such statements secured.
Indicating a targeted approach by the ED, he claimed,
“The mission of the probe agency was accomplished and thereafter, the co-accused were neither arrested nor any further statements were taken,”.
The AAP leader also accused the ED of exhibiting “malicious intent” in its investigative procedures by selectively disclosing statements from co-accused highlighting those that implicated him while concealing those that did not.
Kejriwal also contested the linkage made by the ED between himself and an alleged Rs 45 crore transaction by the South group, purportedly as an advance kickback for the AAP’s activities in the Goa elections. He stated that this assertion by the ED unfounded.
Read Also:Arvind Kejriwal Returns to Tihar: A Review of Previous Jail Sentences
The ED, in its defense submitted to the apex court, maintained that Kejriwal’s arrest was justified, labeling him as the “kingpin and key conspirator” in the excise policy scam. The agency argued that non-cooperation with the investigation after being summoned nine times left them with “little option” but to arrest him, asserting that such actions do not contravene the principles of “free and fair elections.”
Kejriwal remains in judicial custody at Tihar jail following his arrest on March 21, after the Delhi High Court declined his request for protection from coercive action by the ED. The Supreme Court since intervened, issuing a notice to the ED on April 15, seeking its response to Kejriwal’s plea, which challenges the legality of his arrest. The High Court, on April 9, upheld the legality of the arrest, citing Kejriwal’s repeated refusal to respond to summonses and engage with the investigation.
The controversy stems from allegations of corruption and money laundering in the creation and implementation of Delhi’s excise policy for the year 2021-22, which has since been rescinded.