The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea filed by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with the Delhi Excise Policy case, as well as the remand order passed by the trial court sending him to ED custody.The order was passed by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who reserved the verdict after hearing arguments at length on April 3.Kejriwal was arrested by the ED on March 21 in a money laundering case related to the Delhi Excise Policy of 2021. He was produced before Delhi's Rouse Avenue Court, which remanded him to ED custody till March 28.He then challenged his arrest and remand before the High Court.In his plea, Kejriwal contended that the Central government was misusing the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) - under which he was arrested - to create a non-level playing field in the lead up to the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.The Central government is trying to skew the electoral process in the favour of the ruling party at the Centre (Bharatiya Janata Party), which controls the ED through the Ministry of Finance, Kejriwal alleged.On March 28, the Rouse Avenue Court extended the ED's custody of Kejriwal till April 1. On April 1, he was remanded to judicial custody till April 15.He is presently lodged in Tihar Jail.Arguments in the caseAdditional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, appearing for the ED, had argued,"Aam aadmi (common man) has to go behind bars if he has committed a crime, but because you are a Chief Minister you can't be arrested? You will loot the country but no one can touch you because the elections are coming?"In response to Kejriwal's argument that the arrest was politically motivated in view of the upcoming elections, the ASG said,"Take a case of a terrorist who is also a politician. He blows up an Army vehicle and says I want to contest elections so you can't touch me? What kind of argument is this?"He further said that whether the statements made by witnesses against Kejriwal - the basis for his arrest - are true or not is a matter to be decided at trial."There are statements to show that outsiders were involved from the drafting of the policy to its formulation," it was submitted.Importantly, the ASG also said that a person responsible for the affairs of the party would be liable and that his personal role might not be relevant."Forget his role. Role is not required to be looked at. What is required to be looked at is that he was responsible for the affairs of the company/party."Kejriwal was arrested because he was responsible for the affairs of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which benefited from the money laundering, he added.Pertinently, on Kejriwal's argument that proceeds of crime have not been recovered and that the ED has not been able to trace the money trail, Raju said,"The money trail is there. We have located the money trail. The money may have been used and that is why it can't be found."Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Kejriwal, strongly contested the arguments by the ASG, especially the comparisons drawn by the ASG to a terrorist blowing up a vehicle."He came with bizarre examples of a terrorist blowing up an Army vehicle...The second example is a heinous crime. Did any of these heinous crimes which they accuse me of happen after notification of election?"He added,"My point is if a man, a Chief Minister blows up an Army vehicle, he should be arrested. But is that a fair analogy (to the present case)?" Singhvi demanded.On the ASG's argument regarding proceeds of the alleged crime, Singhvi said,"Let's deal with proceeds of crime. He says if the body is not found, murder case goes on...What is the standalone offence of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA)? A good example is suppose a bribe giver is caught on spot the same moment receiver is receiving the money. When the bribe is being given, it is either a PC Act or Income Tax Act offence. It is not a money laundering offence. Can ED jump into this situation and say that 'I (ED) still get jurisdiction when there is no proceeds of crime?'."Regarding the ASG's argument that Kejriwal's role is not relevant, Singhvi countered,"There is no evidence against him (Kejriwal) that he is involved in the offence of money laundering. It is preposterous to say that Chief Minister of Delhi will be handling hawala transactions. I want to ask how does awareness of conspiracy become a valid ground for offence under Section 3 PMLA? Because you are aware of the conspiracy you are an accused of PMLA? I am again saying that this is turning PMLA on its head."Along with Singhvi, Senior Advocates Amit Desai and Vikram Chaudhary and Advocates Vivek Jain, Mohd Irshad, Rajat Bhardwaj, Karan Sharma, Rajat Jain, Mohit Siwach, Kaustubh Khanna, Rishikesh Kumar, Shailesh Chauhan, Sadiq Noor, Mehul Prasad, Priyanka Sarda, Sheenu Priya and Princy Sharma appeared for Kejriwal.Along with Raju, Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain and Advocates Annam Venkatesh, Arkaj Kumar, Vivek Gurnani, Hitarth Raja, Abhipriya Rai, Kartik Sabharwal, Vivek Gaurav, Agrimaa Singh, Kanishk Maurya and Ritumbhara Garg appeared for the ED.
TAGS: : Delhi High Court Arvind Kejriwal Enforcement Directorate plea arrest remand money laundering case
