New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday scrutinized Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s stance on his arrest despite his refusal to provide a statement to the Enforcement Directorate regarding the Delhi liquor policy case. Justice Sanjiv Khanna, part of the two-judge bench overseeing the case, raised questions about Kejriwal’s challenge, emphasizing that without the recording of Section 50 statements, the defense of non-recording cannot be claimed.
Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) pertains to the authority of ED officials to issue summons and gather documents, evidence, and other relevant materials.
Kejriwal, in his petition, argued the illegality of his arrest and custody, alleging political motives, evident from the timing—just before the general elections. He asserted that the aim was to destabilize his political party and overthrow the elected government of the NCT of Delhi.
During the hearing, Kejriwal’s counsel, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, contended that arrest should be based on evidence of guilt, not mere suspicion, citing the threshold in Section 45 of the PMLA. Singhvi highlighted that the investigating agency had not recorded Kejriwal’s statement.
The bench questioned the contradiction in claiming that Kejriwal’s statements under Section 50 were not recorded, yet he failed to appear for summons for their recording. They questioned the investigating officer’s options if Kejriwal didn’t comply with repeated summons.
Singhvi responded that non-recording of Section 50 statements does not justify arrest based on suspicion of guilt. He argued that other materials also fail to establish Kejriwal’s guilt and questioned why the ED couldn’t record his statement at his residence.
The Enforcement Directorate stated that Kejriwal had skipped nine summons for questioning, emphasizing that non-cooperation shouldn’t be grounds for arrest. Singhvi referenced a previous court ruling stating that non-cooperation cannot warrant arrest under the PMLA.
He also noted that Kejriwal had cooperated with the Central Bureau of Investigation during questioning on April 16 last year.
The Enforcement Directorate accused Kejriwal of evasiveness and lack of cooperation during the recording of his statement under Section 17 of the PMLA. Kejriwal was arrested on March 21 and later placed in judicial custody at Tihar jail on April 1.
Earlier this month, the Delhi High Court upheld Kejriwal’s arrest, citing the Enforcement Directorate’s limited options due to his repeated summons evasion.
The Central Bureau of Investigation alleged that liquor companies influenced the 2021-22 Delhi excise policy, which was subsequently scrapped. They claimed that kickbacks from a liquor lobby, dubbed the “South Group,” led to the formulation of the policy, which would have yielded them a 12% profit. The Enforcement Directorate alleged that these kickbacks were laundered.
The hearing is set to continue on Tuesday.
Read More:
