Delhi HC Rejects Arvind Kejriwal Plea Challenging ED Arrest And Remand In Excise Policy Case
On April 9, 2024, the Delhi High Court dismissed Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea challenging his arrest and remand in the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) money laundering investigation linked to the Delhi Excise Policy 2021–22. The Court upheld the legality of both his arrest and subsequent remand to ED custody.
Legal Context: Money Laundering and the PMLA
The ED's investigation is based on the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), which criminalizes money laundering and related offenses. The ED alleged that Kejriwal was involved in formulating the excise policy to facilitate kickbacks, which were then laundered through hawala channels and used to fund election campaigns, including the 2022 Goa Assembly elections. The ED invoked Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA, charging him with money laundering and conspiracy.
Key Points from the Delhi High Court's Judgment
Legality of Arrest and Remand
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma ruled that Kejriwal’s arrest on March 21, 2024, and his remand to ED custody were in accordance with the law. The Court found that the ED had sufficient material, including hawala transactions and statements from approvers, to justify his arrest. The Court emphasized that the timing of the arrest, occurring shortly before the national elections, did not render it illegal. It stated that political considerations are irrelevant in determining the legality of an arrest.
Credibility of Approver Statements
Kejriwal contested the reliability of statements from approvers, particularly Raghav Magunta and Sarath Reddy, who allegedly implicated him in the money laundering scheme. The Court rejected this argument, stating that the statements were recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and Section 50 of the PMLA, which are legally recognized procedures. It held that casting doubt on these statements amounted to questioning the judicial process.
Non-Compliance with Investigation
The Court noted that Kejriwal had failed to cooperate with the investigation despite receiving multiple summons from the ED. Between October 2023 and March 2024, he received nine summons but did not appear before the agency. The Court found that this non-compliance contributed to the necessity of his arrest.
Judicial Independence
The Court emphasized that its decision was based solely on legal principles and not influenced by political factors. It stated that the matter was between the accused and the ED, not between the central government and Kejriwal. The Court also rejected the argument that the arrest was politically motivated, affirming its commitment to constitutional morality over political considerations.
Implications and Future Developments
Following the High Court's decision, Kejriwal's legal team expressed intent to appeal the ruling. The Enforcement Directorate has indicated that it is not seeking the cancellation of Kejriwal's bail but maintains that the trial court's bail order is "perverse and erroneous" and should be overturned. The High Court has scheduled a hearing to consider petitions filed by Kejriwal and former AAP minister Manish Sisodia, challenging the trial court’s acceptance of the ED’s chargesheet without proper prosecution sanction at the time. The ED has since received the Union Home Ministry's sanction in January 2025 to proceed with prosecution, rendering the petitions moot according to the agency.
The Delhi High Court's ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rule of law, irrespective of political affiliations or timing. It reinforces the principle that legal proceedings must be based on evidence and legal standards, not political considerations.
RELATED Blog
0 comments