CBI backs Delhi CM Kejriwal’s arrest: Key to ‘just conclusion’ of probe

A bench comprising justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan adjourned the matter to September 5 after CBI requested additional time to file another affidavit

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has justified the arrest of Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal in the Delhi excise policy case, accusing the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief of playing a “pivotal role” in the formulation and implementation of the controversial policy.

Arvind Kejriwal being taken to Tihar Jail Gate No. 1 in New Delhi on June 2. (Vipin Kumar/HT Photo)

According to the agency, Kejriwal’s arrest was “essential for the just conclusion of the investigation”, particularly given the CM’s non-cooperation and the substantial evidence pointing to his involvement. This came even as the Supreme Court on Friday postponed the hearing of Kejriwal’s petition seeking release from jail to September 5.

A bench comprising justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan adjourned the matter to September 5 after CBI requested additional time to file another affidavit opposing bail for Kejriwal.

Separately, Kejriwal has also appealed against the August 5 decision of the Delhi high court, which upheld his arrest and denied him bail.

During the brief hearing on Friday, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, accused CBI of intentionally delaying proceedings to extend his client’s detention. “A short date was given by this court on the last occasion. One counter was given, and another was not given. The counter was also filed late at night yesterday to ensure it does not reach the judges,” Singhvi argued.

Responding to Singhvi, additional solicitor general SV Raju said that the agency had filed one reply within the limited time available and denied any delay on the part of the agency. The bench then granted the CBI an additional week to submit the second affidavit and two days to Kejriwal’s legal team for submitting their rejoinder.

Submitting an affidavit on Thursday night in response to Kejriwal’s petition challenging his arrest, the agency contended that his actions were not only illegal but were also part of a “larger conspiracy” involving significant financial irregularities and misuse of public office.

The CBI accused Kejriwal of attempting to politicise the case, arguing that he is trying to “politically sensationalise the case before court, despite repeated orders passed by various courts being prima facie satisfied of the commission of the offences.”

Asserting that Kejriwal’s arrest was lawful, with due procedure followed at every step, the CBI highlighted that the Delhi high court had already dismissed Kejriwal’s writ petition, concluding that “it cannot be said that the arrest of the petitioner (Kejriwal) was without any justifiable reasons or was illegal.”

While hearing the matter on August 14, the top court had denied immediate interim bail to the Delhi CM and sought a response from the agency. The Delhi high court had on August 5 upheld Kejriwal’s June 26 arrest and remand by a trial court, ruling that his arrest was neither illegal nor without justifiable grounds because CBI presented “evidently enough evidence” to warrant his detention and remand.

Kejriwal approached the Supreme Court on August 12, two days after the top court granted bail to former Delhi deputy CM Manish Sisodia in the related probed by CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED). In his petition before the Supreme Court, Kejriwal relied heavily on the Sisodia verdict, in which the top court held that the former deputy CM’s long incarceration of 17 months and his continued detention in a case where there was no hope of trial ending anytime soon impinged on his fundamental right to liberty and speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. The AAP chief’s petition argued that the grounds on which the court found it appropriate to release Sisodia on bail should equally apply to him.

CBI’s affidavit before the top court premised on Kejriwal’s alleged involvement in the formulation and execution of the Delhi excise policy 2021-22, which was later scrapped over allegations of irregularities and corruption, followed by a probe ordered by the Delhi lieutenant governor.

Although Kejriwal did not hold any official ministerial portfolio, CBI contended that “all critical decisions in the formulation of the new excise policy were taken at the behest of the petitioner, in connivance with the then deputy chief minister and minister of excise, Manish Sisodia.”

According to CBI, Kejriwal’s influence extended beyond the Delhi government, with his directives allegedly shaping decisions across the AAP’s national footprint. The agency claimed that Kejriwal was central to the policy’s privatisation plan, which included tweaking and manipulating the policy to benefit specific entities. One such manipulation, as alleged by CBI, was the increase in profit margins for wholesalers from 5% to 12%, a change that purportedly resulted in a windfall gain for certain groups in exchange for illegal gratification of ₹100 crore from the “South Group” – comprising liquor business from the southern part of India.

It added that Kejriwal cannot claim parity with other accused in the case (Sisodia) owing to his key role in the criminal conspiracy and specifically because all decisions of the Delhi government and the party were taken only according to his directions.

A significant portion of the affidavit was dedicated to tracing the financial transactions linked to the excise policy with the CBI alleging that ₹44.54 crore was funneled through hawala channels from Delhi to Goa to fund the AAP’s election campaign during the 2021-22 Goa assembly elections. These funds were reportedly received and distributed by individuals closely associated with the party, including Chanpreet Singh Rayat and Rajiv Ashok Mondkar, under the instructions of Vijay Nair, a key figure in AAP’s campaign strategy, according to the agency.

The affidavit also contended that data retrieved from the hard drives and mobile phones of the accused corroborated Kejriwal’s involvement. This included WhatsApp chats, screenshots and contact details linking Kejriwal to the financial transactions and policy decisions under scrutiny. The agency said these documents indicate a direct connection between Kejriwal and the illicit activities, further implicating him in the case.

CBI’s affidavit also highlighted Kejriwal’s alleged non-cooperation during the investigation, claiming that when Kejriwal was interrogated in Tihar jail on June 25, 2024, he was “evasive and non-cooperative,” failing to provide satisfactory answers regarding his role in the ₹100 crore bribe allegedly paid to the AAP by the South Group. CBI alleged that despite being confronted with incriminating evidence, Kejriwal provided contradictory statements and concealed critical information, which impeded the investigation.This behavior, according to CBI, justified Kejriwal’s arrest.

The affidavit further detailed that the decision to arrest him was not taken lightly and was only made after Kejriwal’s interrogation revealed his “pivotal role” in the conspiracy, coupled with his attempts to derail the investigation. CBI underscored that Kejriwal’s influence, both as the Delhi CM and as the AAP national convenor, posed a risk to the integrity of the investigation, with the potential for witness tampering and evidence destruction.

CBI sought to dismantle Kejriwal’s claim that his arrest was unwarranted, arguing that all procedural requirements under the law, including those under Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code, were met. Stressing that there was sufficient compliance with the legal provisions, the agency stated that the necessity for Kejriwal’s arrest was thoroughly documented in the case diary, which was reviewed by both the special court and the Delhi high court.

Furthermore, CBI pointed out that Kejriwal’s arrest was sanctioned by the relevant authorities under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, following a thorough investigation that pointed to his central role in the alleged crimes.

Kejriwal has been in custody since March 21 following his arrest by ED, apart from a 21-day interim bail in May granted by the top court for Lok Sabha elections campaigning. On July 12, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the ED case, acknowledging that he had spent over 90 days in incarceration. Still, he continued to remain in custody due to his arrest by CBI on June 26 in the same matter.