No immediate relief to CM Kejriwal; SC issues notices

Supreme Court declines interim release for Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal in money laundering case, sets next hearing for April 29, affecting AAP's election campaign.

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal’s appeal for an interim release in relation to a money laundering probe linked to Delhi excise policy case until the Enforcement Directorate (ED) responds, and said it would hear his petition against a Delhi high court order denying his request to be released from custody on April 29, in a setback for the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief.

Punjab CM Bhagwant Mann on Monday. (ANI)

The court issued notice on his petition, but a bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta further refused to set down the next hearing of the matter on or before April 19 -- when the voting for the first round of the Lok Sabha elections is scheduled -- even as the AAP convener argued that the objective of his arrest was to disable him from campaigning for his party.

Fixing the next hearing in the week commencing April 29, the court told the CM’s lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi: “We cannot give you a shorter date. This is the shortest possible date we can give. We have not given such a short date in any other matter today.”

That would mean Kejriwal will remain in jail till at least the first two phases of polling, April 19 and April 26, are complete. The seven Lok Sabha seats in Delhi go to polls on May 25 in the penultimate phase of the seven-phase national election. The results will be declared on June 4.

Senior counsel Singhvi, on his part, pressed for an early hearing and added that he would be seeking an “interim release” of the Delhi CM.

“I want to show some facts, to shock the conscience of the court...This is a very unusual matter...not because he is chief minister but because of the manner in which he has been arrested. The story started in September 2022, and he is arrested in March this year. Between them, there are 15 statements by others,” argued Singhvi, urging the court to consider listing the matter on Friday.

But the bench asked the senior lawyer to keep his powder dry for the next date. “Please, reserve your arguments for the next date...and the other thing (early hearing) is not possible. We can give you a short date but what you are saying is not possible,” it said.

Solicitor general Tushar Mehta and additional solicitor general SV Raju appeared for the ED and agreed to submit their response to Kejriwal’s appeal against the April 9 judgment of the single judge bench of the Delhi high court by April 24.

The Delhi CM hurried to the Supreme Court on April 10, less than 24 hours after the Delhi high court rejected his plea against the ED arrest while holding that the agency possesses adequate evidence at this stage to suggest Kejriwal’s involvement in money laundering related to the excise policy case.

Arrested by ED on March 21, Kejriwal’s appeal in the top court painted a picture of a politically motivated witch-hunt orchestrated by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) at the Centre and emphasised the wider implications of his arrest for democratic governance and the rule of law in India.

On April 9, justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed Kejriwal’s plea for release from jail, rejecting his argument of political vendetta amid the looming Lok Sabha elections. The court underscored that Kejriwal’s absence from nine ED summons over six months undermined any claims of special privilege as chief minister, suggesting his arrest was an inevitable consequence of his non-cooperation.

In a comprehensive 106-page judgment, the high court detailed Kejriwal’s alleged role in devising the Delhi excise policy 2021-22, purportedly involving kickbacks from the so-called “South Group”, comptising politicians and businessmen from South India and manipulation of illicit funds. It outlined two dimensions of Kejriwal’s purported involvement in money laundering -- first, in his personal capacity for policy formulation and kickback solicitation; and second, as the national convener of the AAP, accused of utilising ₹45 crore in tainted funds during the 2022 Goa elections.

Rebutting the court’s findings, Kejriwal’s petition in the Supreme Court denounced the alleged political motives behind his arrest and accused the ruling BJP of orchestrating a deliberate attempt to stifle opposition voices.

The Delhi CM underscored the timing of his arrest, which occurred just five days after the announcement of general elections and the imposition of the Model Code of Conduct. As the national convener of the AAP, Kejriwal argued that his arrest provided the ruling party an unfair advantage in the upcoming elections, compromising the principle of free and fair elections – a cornerstone of democratic governance.

“The timing (of arrest), the so-called ‘materials’ in possession of the respondent (ED), the manner in which those materials were brought into existence, and the conduct of the BJP post the petitioner’s arrest, each demonstrate the way the machinery of law has been harnessed with the ‘oblique object’ of knocking out the political opposition,” stated the plea.

Kejriwal urged the top court to urgently intervene in the matter, arguing that over and above the issue of illegal curtailment of liberty, his arrest also constitutes an unprecedented assault on the tenets of democracy based on “free and fair elections” and “federalism”, both of which form significant constituents of the basic structure of the Constitution.

“The present case is a classic case of how the ruling party led central government has misused the central agency, Enforcement Directorate and its wide powers under PMLA to crush its biggest political opponent -- Aam Aadmi Party and its leaders...During an election cycle when political activity is at its highest, the petitioner’s illegal arrest has caused grave prejudice to the petitioner’s political party, and will provide the ruling party at the Centre an unjust upper hand in the upcoming elections,” said the petition.

The petition added that the CM’s arrest was to inure it to the political benefit of the ruling party at the Centre through its “favorite agency used for targeting the Opposition”. The arrest is, thus, liable to be quashed solely on the ground of being a result of malice in law, it pressed.

Kejriwal alleged that the ED’s investigation was riddled with irregularities, including the deliberate concealment of exculpatory evidence and the coercion of witnesses to furnish false statements. He contended that the lack of concrete evidence linking him to any wrongdoing rendered his arrest baseless and illegal.

“By categorising such statements as ‘unrelied upon documents’, ED unlawfully seeks to withhold evidence from both the courts and the accused person. This intentional act of concealing pertinent information serves to undermine the integrity of the investigative process. Such actions reflect a clear disregard for due process and the principles of justice,” contended the plea.

The petition also spoke of ED’s alleged abuse of its authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), citing instances where co-accused were purportedly coerced into providing incriminating statements against Kejriwal in exchange for leniency. Kejriwal argued that ED’s reliance on such coerced statements as the basis for his arrest violated fundamental principles of justice and due process.

“None of the four conditions of Section 19 (arrest under PMLA) stand satisfied in this matter and the arrest is totally illegal, mala fide and to violate petitioner’s fundamental rights. There is no ‘material’, no ‘reason to believe’, no basis for a finding of ‘guilty’, and (no necessity to arrest...ED in the present case has grossly abused their power u/s 50 and 45 PMLA and resorted to coercing, threatening various co-accused,” added the plea.

Addressing specific allegations levelled against him, Kejriwal refuted claims of financial impropriety during the Goa elections, arguing there was no substantiating evidence to link him or his party to any illicit activities.

“There exists no proof or material demonstrating that the AAP received funds or advanced kickbacks from the South group, let alone utilizing them in the Goa election campaign. Not a single rupee was traced back to the AAP, and the allegations put forth in this regard are devoid of any tangible evidence, rendering them vague, baseless without any corroboration,” stated the plea.

It also contended that the CM cannot be made vicariously liable for the affairs of the AAP and potentially subject to charges of money laundering under Section 70(1) of PMLA nor could the alleged use of money in Goa elections by AAP could form a ground to justify his arrest by ED.

“In the 22 years of the PMLA’s existence, a political party has never been sought to be made an accused as a ‘company’ under Section 70, arresting a senior leader of that political party who is also holding a constitutional post of Chief Minister of the national capital on the basis of a mere deeming fiction, with absolutely no incriminating materials, is not just without basis in law, but prima facie malafide,” the petition maintained.

Moreover, Kejriwal lamented the Delhi high court’s handling of his case, claiming it made observations on matters beyond the scope of the proceedings and failing to adequately scrutinise the legality of his arrest. He argued that HC failed to recognise the political motivations behind his arrest.

AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sandeep Pathak said common people respect the judiciary.

“We have full faith in the judiciary and hope that Arvind Kejriwal will get bail soon. Because, in the end, truth prevails. There is a complete process of law, and everyone has to go through it. In such a situation, whatever decision will be taken by the judiciary, we will accept unanimously,” he said during a press conference at the AAP headquarters.

Delhi BJP leaders did not respond to requests for comments.