New Delhi. The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal why he was not appearing before the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for questioning in a money laundering case related to the excise policy. Apart from this, the court asked the Enforcement Directorate’s stand on Kejriwal’s petition, in which he has challenged the summons issued against him in the money laundering case related to the excise policy ‘scam’.
The Enforcement Directorate claimed that the petition of the national convenor of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) is not maintainable. Some provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act have also been challenged in the petition. A bench headed by Justice Suresh Kumar Kait asked Kejriwal, “Why do you not appear when you receive summons? Who is stopping you from not appearing?”
The high court bench noted that the first summons was issued in October last year and said that before anything else, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Kejriwal is a citizen of the country. In this case, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the petitioner Kejriwal, said that his client will appear before the ED, but in this case there is a need for protection from punitive action as the agency is planning to arrest him (Kejriwal) when the elections are near. The intention is clear.
Kejriwal has moved the court in the wake of recent ED summons, the ninth summons issued by the ED asking him to appear on March 21 for questioning under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The Chief Minister has consistently refused to appear before the agency, terming the ED summons as illegal.
The court said arrest on the ‘first or second day’ of investigation is not a ‘normal procedure’ as an investigating agency first records reasons for doing so if there are grounds for arrest of the accused in the case. However, citing the arrest of AAP leaders Sanjay Singh and Manish Sisodia in this case, the senior advocate claimed that now a “new style” of working is in vogue.
Singhvi said, “I will appear before the ED. I will also answer the questionnaire, but, I need security. I am not postponing it. I am not running away from ED. I will come myself but I want security, no forceful action. I am not a common criminal. Where can I run? Can anyone have more roots in society than me?”
Singhvi also argued that the ED has asked Kejriwal to appear before it without clarifying whether he is an accused, a suspect or a witness in the case. The court said that if he (Kejriwal) appears as per the summons, he would know his status and also asked why he did not take appropriate legal action if he feared arrest.
The High Court said, “You received the first summons on October 30. We have seen your reply and you have given several reasons, including that the festival of Diwali is around the corner. And now, we are nearing the next festival, elections. So, this will continue. Before anything else, you are a citizen of the country, these summons have been issued in your name.”
At the same time, the ED said that the petition of the AAP national convenor, in which some provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) have also been challenged, is not maintainable and it opposed issuing a formal notice. A bench headed by Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has given two weeks time to the ED to file its reply in this regard.
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing in the court on behalf of the ED, said that the issue of constitutional validity of PMLA provisions has already been resolved by the Supreme Court and no stay can be imposed if there is any presumption regarding such validity. The next hearing of this case will be on April 22.
This case pertains to alleged corruption in the formulation and implementation of the excise policy of the Delhi government for 2021-22. This controversial policy was later canceled. Lieutenant Governor V.K. Following Saxena’s recommendation, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered an FIR in the alleged corruption case and on the basis of this, the ED started investigating the money laundering charges.
A Delhi court had on Saturday granted bail to Kejriwal in two complaints lodged by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for not appearing on summons in a money laundering case related to the alleged excise policy scam. The court had also directed ED to hand over the documents related to the complaints to Kejriwal. The ED had filed two complaints in the magistrate court and requested to prosecute Kejriwal for not appearing despite several summons being issued in this case.
,
Tags: AAP, Arvind kejriwal, DELHI HIGH COURT, Delhi liquor scam, Enforcement directorate
FIRST PUBLISHED: March 20, 2024, 22:49 IST