Evasion of summons intentional, says ED; AAP hits out at Centre

ED files complaint against Delhi CM Kejriwal for skipping summons related to excise policy. AAP claims ED actions are politically motivated. Kejriwal calls the summons illegal.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Wednesday filed a complaint against Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal in a city court, accusing him of raising “frivolous and vexatious” objections while skipping the federal agency’s summons in connection with alleged irregularities in the Capital’s excise policy 2021-22.

Arvind Kejriwal has skipped eight summons issued by ED. (HT Photo)

The Aam Aadmi Party, however, hit back saying that despite several court orders emphasising that ED must inform in what capacity is being summoned, the central government refuses to follow court orders and “considers itself above the law”.

Later, in a post on X, Kejriwal said, “This is the truth of ED’s action. Those who refuse to go to BJP, they send them to jail. If Satyendra Jain, Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh join BJP today, they will get bail tomorrow. It is not that these three have committed any crime, they just refused to join BJP. If I join BJP today, I too will stop getting summons from ED.”

Kejriwal, the Aam Aadmi Party’s national convenor, has skipped eight summons issued by ED, calling them “illegal and politically motivated”. He has also objected to the summons, stating that it was not clear whether he was asked to appear before ED as a witness or suspect; as chief minister or AAP chief; and without any details on the line of questioning.

In its submission before additional chief metropolitan magistrate (ACMM) Divya Malhotra on Wednesday, ED said that Kejriwal’s actions constituted “intentional disobedience”.

“It is a wilful and intentional disobedience to the summons, making out an offence under section 174 of the IPC... The grounds raised by him (Kejriwal) for not complying with the summons are frivolous and vexatious and therefore, prima facie the offence is made out,” additional solicitor general (ASG) SV Raju, appearing for the federal agency, said.

IPC section 174 states a person not appearing on the summons issued by a public servant shall be punished with imprisonment upto one month and a fine of ₹500.

“It appears that the person is interrogating the investigating officer and not the other way around… Under which provision is he supposed to know under what role is he being called? He wants information that cannot be divulged,” Raju told the court.

The court reserved its order on the plea, saying the order will be passed on March 7.

Kejriwal was not represented through a legal team on Wednesday since it was preliminary hearing on ED’s fresh complaint.

To be sure, this is the second time that the federal agency has filed a complaint against Kejriwal, seeking initiation of prosecution against him for not appearing before investigators.

In the first complaint filed on February 7, the court summoned Kejriwal on February 17, while observing that he was “legally bound” to join the ED probe.

However, Kejriwal appeared before the court through virtual conference, and the court granted him exemption from physical appearance on the day, listing the matter for hearing on March 16.