New Delhi: As Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal’s judicial custody was extended till April 23 by a trial court, the Supreme Court on Monday sought the Enforcement Directorate’s response on his plea challenging his arrest in a money-laundering case linked to the excise policy “scam”.
Without granting any interim relief to Mr Kejriwal, a two-judge apex court bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta asked the ED to file its reply to the plea by April 24, and said the matter would be heard in the week beginning April 29. Mr Kejriwal has challenged the Delhi high court's April 9 order that had upheld his arrest.
In the Rouse Avenue court, special judge Kaveri Baweja extended Mr Kejriwal’s custody after he was produced before the court through video-conferencing on the expiry of his period of custody granted earlier.
The ED sought extension of Mr Kejriwal’s custody by 14 days, saying the investigation was at a crucial stage. The judge extended Mr Kejriwal's judicial custody till April 23, noting that the judicial custody of some co-accused in the case, including BRS leader K. Kavitha, was ending that day. The court had on April 1 sent Mr Kejriwal to judicial custody till April 15.
In the apex court, senior advocate Abhishek “Manu” Singhvi, representing Mr Kejriwal, questioned the timing of his arrest after the model code of conduct for the general election had come into force and said it was done to prevent him from campaigning.
Dubbing his arrest a “very unusual matter”, not just because Mr Kejriwal was a chief minister, Mr Singhvi told the bench that he wanted to show some facts which would “shock” the conscience of the court.
He said a lot of “selective leaks all over the place” was giving everybody a wrong impression.
To this, Justice Khanna said: “I am not aware of selective leaks. Let a notice be issued.”
Solicitor-general Tushar Mehta and additional solicitor-general S.V. Raju, who represented the ED, said the probe agency will file its reply to the petition.
“I am now asking for an extremely short date of Friday for a reason,” Mr Singhvi said, buttressing his arguments for an early hearing in the matter.
Justice Khanna then told Mr Singhvi: “We will give a reasonable date, a very short date, but not what you are saying. That is not possible.”
Mr Singhvi argued that the CBI and the ED have filed eight chargesheets in the excise case and Mr Kejriwal had not been named in any of them. “The story starts from September 2022 and he (Mr Kejriwal) is arrested in March 2024,” he said, adding that during this period, 15 statements, including nine by one person and six by others, were recorded and none of them named Mr Kejriwal.
“Reserve your arguments for the next date,” Justice Khanna told Mr Singhvi, who continued to question the timing of the AAP chief’s arrest.
When Mr Singhvi continued his arguments saying the first round of polling was now going to be held on April 19, the bench said: “After we have said issue notice, you should not have even argued. We know the facts. We have gone through the paper book. We spent so much time.”
Mr Mehta insisted that electioneering cannot be a ground for seeking relief in such matters.
While issuing notice to the ED, the bench asked the anti-money laundering probe agency to file its reply on or before April 24 and rejoinder, if any, can be submitted by April 27.
On April 9, the high court had upheld Mr Kejriwal’s arrest in the money laundering case, saying there was no illegality about it and that the ED was left with “little option” after he skipped repeated summonses and refused to join the investigation.
The matter relates to alleged corruption and money laundering in the formulation and execution of the Delhi government's excise policy for 2021-22, which was later scrapped by the Delhi government.
The ED had arrested Kejriwal on March 21, hours after the high court refused to grant him protection from coercive action by the agency.
Mr Kejriwal, who is currently undergoing judicial custody in Tihar Jail, termed his arrest ahead of the parliamentary polls as an “unprecedented assault on the tenets of democracy” and urged the apex court to release him by declaring the case against him as “illegal”.
Claiming his arrest as "obviously motivated by extraneous considerations", Mr Kejriwal’s plea said, "The intervention of this court is urgently warranted, as over and above the issue of illegal curtailment of liberty, the petitioner's arrest also constitutes an unprecedented assault on the tenets of democracy, free-and-fair elections and federalism, both of which form significant constituents of the basic structure of the Constitution."
The arrest was made solely relying on “subsequent, contradictory and highly-belated statements” of the co-accused, who have now turned approvers, the plea before the top court said.
“The petitioner's arrest bears serious, irreversible ramifications for the future of electoral democracy in India and if he is not released forthwith to participate in the upcoming elections, it will establish a precedence in law for ruling parties to arrest heads of the political Opposition on flimsy and vexatious charges before elections, thereby eroding the core principles of our Constitution,” the plea said.
Mr Kejriwal’s petition said the high court failed to appreciate that statements made before a probe agency are not held to be the gospel truth and can always be doubted by the courts.
