Was ED Letting A Guilty Chief Minister Roam Free For Months? Singhvi Questions Need & Timing Of Kejriwal's Arrest Before Supreme Court

While arguing Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's plea challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in the Delhi Liquor Policy case, Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi alleged before the Supreme Court today that the AAP leader's arrest was consequent to Model Code of Conduct (with respect to Lok Sabha elections) being put in place, even though there was no "reason to believe" or "new" material with the agency to take the action.After hearing Singhvi for about an hour, the Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta posted the matter tomorrow. Although some difficulty was expressed by Additional Solicitor General SV Raju (who prayed on behalf of ED that the matter be heard on Wednesday), the bench said that the matter would be listed tomorrow and if need arises, the ASG would be accommodated.At the outset of the hearing, the bench asked Singhvi if Kejriwal has filed any bail application before the trial court. Singhvi replied that no bail application has been filed; instead, the writ petition has been filed challenging the arrest. In response to Justice Khanna's curiosity to know the reasons for not filing bail application, Singhvi stated that the arrest was illegal for violating Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and hence the writ petition dealt with the wider import.Singhvi questions the 'Need' for Kejriwal's arrestTaking the court through his note and list of dates, Singhvi firstly argued that there was no need for Kejriwal's arrest by the ED. He pled that none of the documents (including FIRs, chargesheets, supplementary chargesheets, prosecution complaints, etc.) filed between August 2022 till the date of arrest connected Kejriwal with the alleged scam "even remotely". He was not named in the CBI FIR or in the ED Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR), Singhvi said.The senior lawyer vehemently pressed that there were also chargesheets by the CBI and prosecution complaint(s) filed by the ED which did not name Kejriwal. Regardless, he was arrested based on some Section 50 PMLA statements, which were made under questionable circumstances but taken to be the gospel truth.With regard to the statements recorded and relied upon by the agency, Singhvi averred that not all statements of Raghav Magunta, Buchi Babu, Sarath Reddy etc. name Kejriwal. It was emphasized that Sarath Reddy never named Kejriwal in nine statements given to the ED - only the 10th statement was incriminating. The same was not corroborated; rather, Reddy was found to have purchased electoral bonds for the ruling party ie BJP, Singhvi alleged.When Justice Khanna asked if these arguments are not better raised in a bail application, Singhvi submitted that the PMLA sets a higher threshold for bail. He pointed that the Supreme Court upheld the stringent bail provision under Section 45 of the PMLA on the ground that the statute set a higher threshold for arrest too. Therefore, it was essential for the Court to examine if there were sufficient reasons for arrest.Singhvi questions the 'Timing' of Kejriwal's arrestWhile pressing the argument that an allegedly incriminating statement was made in July last year, yet Kejriwal was arrested in March, 2024, Singhvi highlighted that the AAP leader's arrest immediately succeeded the declaration of Lok Sabha elections."15 statements do not name me. 16th statement taken from someone behind bars...he gets bail later and turns approver. His statement becomes the basis. That statement is July last year. They arrest me in March...You are arresting me in March after the Model Code of Conduct is declared. Either you should be having some material to connect me or there is some imminent material on guilt or some basis...", Singhvi submitted.He drew the court's attention to the dates of all "inculpatory" statements and asked if ED was letting a guilty CM roam freely up until elections were declared: "What are the dates of these 5 statements? Starting from December 2022 and ending in July 2023. Why did they arrest me in March 2024? You (ED) are not arresting a hardened criminal or terrorist who has done something yesterday, last week, two weeks before...something [for which] he will try to run away...what is the imminence? Were you (ED) letting a guilty Chief Minister roam free from December 2022 and through July 2023?".Singhvi also remarked that it was "amusing" how the same documents as were relied in former Delhi Deputy CM Manish Sisodia's case were being referred to by the ED here, after a long time, hinting that there was no 'new material' to justify arrest.Singhvi questions the 'Manner' of Kejriwal's arrestSinghvi further challenged the manner of ED arrest, by pointing that Kejriwal was arrested from his residence on the very day the Delhi High Court denied him interim relief from arrest. It was sought to be impressed that the denial by the High Court did not give ED "reason to believe" that Kejriwal was "guilty"."I argued before learned Single Judge of the Delhi...

Was ED Letting A Guilty Chief Minister Roam Free For Months? Singhvi Questions Need & Timing Of Kejriwal's Arrest Before Supreme Court

Debby Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Was ED Letting A Guilty Chief Minister Roam Free For Months? Singhvi Questions Need & Timing Of Kejriwal's Arrest Before Supreme Court

Debby Jain

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers