ED on Delhi Liquor case
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has defended the arrest of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in a money laundering case linked to the excise policy scam, asserting that over 170 mobile phones associated with the scam were either replaced or destroyed. In an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court, the ED contended that arrests based on evidence, regardless of the individual’s stature, are imperative and do not infringe upon the principles of free and fair elections. The agency emphasised that granting immunity from arrest to criminal politicians would be detrimental, especially if they evade questioning despite multiple summons.
Highlighting the extensive digital evidence tampering, the ED emphasised the destruction of evidence about proceeds of crime and money trails. Rejecting Kejriwal’s plea that his arrest just before elections was politically motivated, the ED stated that it had exercised its powers under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, following due procedure and based on substantial evidence of his involvement in money laundering.
This response comes in light of Kejriwal’s petition challenging the High Court’s validation of his arrest. The Supreme Court had directed the ED to respond to Kejriwal’s petition, which contested the legality of his arrest.
Also read: Akhilesh Yadav Files Nomination From Kannauj Seat
In response, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) criticised the ED, labelling it a “lying machine” serving the interests of the BJP. AAP maintained that the agency lacked evidence against Kejriwal and accused the BJP of diverting attention from its involvement in the excise policy matter. The party alleged that donations from an accused individual were funnelled into BJP’s accounts, which the ED purportedly overlooked.
Meanwhile, the court granted Kejriwal additional time to respond to amendments against ED’s summons. The trial court had issued these summons based on complaints filed by the ED. Manish Sisodia, former Deputy Chief Minister, saw his judicial custody extended in the excise policy case, with the court seeking CBI’s response to a petition against initiating charge framing. The petitioner argued that despite earlier assurances of concluding the investigation within a few months, it remained ongoing. During the proceedings, the judge reprimanded some of the accused’s lawyers for their abrupt departure from the courtroom following the completion of their arguments.
