Kejriwal skips third ED call, sparks massive row

Kejriwal, however, said that he would offer all cooperation in any investigation that is fair and as per law

New DelhiDelhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal on Wednesday skipped the third summons issued to him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a money laundering probe linked to alleged irregularities in the Delhi excise policy, pushing to a crescendo the raging political row over the issue between leaders of the city’s ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which is in power at the Centre.

HT Image

In a letter to the federal agency dated January 3, Kejriwal gave reasons for skipping the summons and described ED’s actions as “opaque” and “motivated”. This prompted the BJP to accuse the CM of being a “kattar beimaan” (staunchly corrupt); AAP leaders hit back with charges of “political vendetta”.

This comes at a time when the AAP has publicly expressed apprehension that Kejriwal may be arrested by ED — just as former deputy CM Manish Sisodia and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh have been — and ran a campaign seeking public feedback on whether he should resign as CM if taken into custody.

Kejriwal skipped two previous summonses on November 2 and on December 22, and in letters to ED at the time raised multiple objections — principal among them that it was not clear whether he was summoned as a witness or suspect; as chief minister or as AAP chief; and without any details on the line of questioning.

In Wednesday’s letter, he alleged that the summons were “issued for vexatious considerations”, appeared to be “in the nature of fishing and roving enquiry”, and ED’s actions smacked of “unwarranted secrecy” by not providing a response to legal objections raised by him in the past.

Kejriwal, however, said that he would offer all cooperation in any investigation that is fair and as per law, cited several reasons for why he was busy with party and government activity, and suggested that a questionnaire be sent to him instead of a personal appearance at the ED office.

“Please note that the Election Commission of India has since decided to hold the elections to the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) inter alia, from National Capital Territory of Delhi. Nominations start from 3 January. Voting will take place on 19th January and results will be declared. The National Capital Territory of Delhi has been allocated 3 seats in the Rajya Sabha and the terms of office of the present incumbents will expire on 27th January, 2024. Therefore, the said elections are being held to fill the above-mentioned vacancies. Being national convener of the Aam Aadmi Party, I am held up in the process and run up to these critical elections,” Kejriwal said in the letter.

“Being the chief minister of Delhi, I am also quite occupied in planning and preparations for several programmes and functions for the Republic Day, 26 January, 2024. In such circumstances, I hope that you shall act as per law by transparently and fairly considering my objections as raised and indicated in my earlier responses dated 02.11 2023 and 20.12.2003,” he added.

He then went on to say that ED has, in the past, provided detailed explanations and responses to queries from people summoned by it. “I am in know of several cases where the Directorate of Enforcement has given a detailed explanation and/or response to any of the queries raised or apprehensions nursed by a person who may have been issued summons under Section 50 PMLA, but in my саse, you have refused to even acknowledge the receipt of the detailed submission made in response to the summons issued to me,” Kejriwal wrote.

Therefore, Kejriwal added, ED’s “non-disclosure and non-response” approach cannot sustain the test of law, equity or justice. “Your obstinacy tantamounts to assuming the role of judge, jury and executioner at the same time which is not acceptable in a country governed by the rule of law,” he said.

“Your silence.... leads me to infer that you are maintaining unwarranted secrecy and are being opaque and arbitrary in the present matter. In my earlier responses and now again, I reiterate my firm commitment to the rule of law and my unflinching undertaking to render any cooperation or assistance in any inquiry or investigation that may be, as per law, fair, just and expedient. However, as stated above, your silence confirms my apprehensions about certain vested interests and extraneous as well as mala fide considerations prevailing over any objective, rational, fair or impartial inquiry or investigations,” Kejriwal added.

A senior ED officer said Kejriwal’s repeated disregard of summons under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is scuttling agency’s probe. “We will reissue the summons as per procedure and are also in touch with our legal experts about the next steps,” this officer said, adding the date for next summons will be decided soon.

ED has alleged that the AAP received kickbacks of ₹100 crore to finalise the excise policy and that a chunk of this was used in the Goa election campaign. The alleged kickbacks were received from the “South Group” and transferred to former AAP communications in-charge Vijay Nair with the help of accused Abhishek Boinpally and Dinesh Arora, it has added. AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh are still in jail in the case in which the agency has arrested 14 people. ED has also approached court seeking permission to investigate the AAP as a beneficiary of the “proceeds of crime”.

In one of its five charge sheets, ED has claimed that the excise policy was Kejriwal’s “brainchild”, and mentioned his name in remand papers with references to alleged meetings, commissions for private players, and the entry of political players and businesspeople from the south into Delhi’s liquor business.

Wednesday’s events prompted a sharp reaction from the BJP.

The party’s Delhi chief Virendra Sachdeva accused Kejriwal of avoiding the ED summons by giving weak excuses.

“They way Arvind Kejriwal is questioning the ED summons, Sisodia, Sanjay Singh and others also used to question the ED summons but later they had to appear before ED and today, despite many efforts, let alone getting bail from any court, they are getting reprimanded from every court. If Kejriwal has objections to the ED notice, then he should go to the concerned court but he won’t do that because he knows that his case is a clear case of corruption and it is almost impossible to get relief from the court,” Sachdeva told media persons.

National spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia said Kejriwal’s refusal to appear in front of the ED was a confirmation of his guilt. “It was expected that Kejriwal would appear before the ED and answer all the questions. But today Kejriwal made an excuse of Lok Sabha elections. This proves that as the links are coming together, the handcuffs are coming close to Arvind Kejriwal. Kejriwal is trembling with fear of the investigating agencies... ,” Bhatia said.

AAP leaders accused the BJP of being“afraid of Kejriwal” and wanting him arrested to keep him from campaigning in the upcoming Lok Sabha polls. “It’s a conspiracy to keep Kejriwal away from campaigning before the upcoming Lok Sabha election by putting him in jail. It is surprising that till now, despite repeated pleas, neither ED nor the central government clarified in what capacity they are summoning Kejriwal. Neither is he a witness, nor an accused,” said Delhi minister Saurabh Bharadwaj.

The excise policy was aimed to revitalise the city’s flagging liquor business and replace a sale volume-based regime with a license fee for traders. It promised swankier stores and a better buying experience. The policy introduced discounts and offers on the purchase of liquor for the first time in Delhi. But it was scrapped after lieutenant governor VK Saxena ordered a probe into the policy for alleged recommending a CBI probe into alleged irregularities in the regime. This ultimately resulted in the policy being scrapped prematurely and being replaced by the 2020-21 regime, with the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) alleging that Saxena’s predecessor sabotaged the move with a few last-minute changes that resulted in lower-than-expected revenues.