ED's Response To Arvind Kejriwal's Plea Against Arrest : Live Updates From Supreme Court

Singhvi: All co-accused in my case first said nothing, then they suddenly said something

Singhvi cites Shivnandan Paswan v. State of Bihar on approver and confessional statements

Singhvi: Now, evaluation of material. (Citing Senthil Balaji judgment) any non-compliance of S.19(1) vitiates arrest

Singhvi: In Manish Sisodia's case, your Lordships said 'no involvement'. Please see finding in para 15 of judgment

Singhvi: All evidence on which I am arrested is pre-2023 end. Every material is as in July, 2023. Same evidence relied in Manish Sisodia's case. Money trail chart was the same.

J Khanna: till you are arrested, you are not an accused

Singhvi: I asked in writing if I am an accused. As per their own understanding, till 16 March, I was not an accused. How do they show necessity to arrest on 21 March to a court?

Singhvi: I am a summonee...as per this para, I am not accused or culpabale. Last summons came on 16.03.2024. It asked me to appear on 21.03.2024. So it is clear that I'm not in position of accused till 16 March. What changed drastically?

Singhvi: Please see ED's reply of 12 January...it says that a person summoned under S.50 PMLA does not assume "character of accused" at the stage of summons, until formal accusation made on gathering all necessary evidence.

Hearing begins

Singhvi leading arguments for Kejriwal