Liquor Policy: Delhi High Court Issues Notice On Arvind Kejriwal's Plea Against Maintainability Of ED Complaint

Update: 2024-11-12 06:21 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

Former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) supremo Arvind Kejriwal moved the Delhi High Court on Tuesday (November 12) challenging the maintainability of complaint filed by the Enforcement Director's (ED) in the alleged liquor policy scam. He has challenged a a trial court order passed on September 17 rejecting his plea challenging the summons issued to him on ED's complaint.A...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

Former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) supremo Arvind Kejriwal moved the Delhi High Court on Tuesday (November 12) challenging the maintainability of complaint filed by the Enforcement Director's (ED) in the alleged liquor policy scam.

He has challenged a a trial court order passed on September 17 rejecting his plea challenging the summons issued to him on ED's complaint.

A single judge bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri issued notice in the plea and sought ED's response in the matter.

Senior Advocate Rebecca John appearing for Kejriwal submitted that when summons were issued to the former Delhi Chief Minister by one ED officer of Assistant Director rank, complaint could not have been filed by another ED officer of same rank. She argued that doing so is barred under Section 195 of CrPC.

Section 195 of CrPC states that the complaint has to be filed in writing by the public servant concerned or any other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate.

He has served the period for which they (ED) can punish me. Three summons were issued by one Joginder who is Assistant Director of ED. The complaint was filed by another Assistant Director (Sandeep Sharma)…. The challenge is with respect to whether he could have filed the complaint,” John said.

She added that it was only Joginder who could have filed the complaint especially when he had neither demitted office nor was unavailable.

Either Joginder could have filed it or his superior. If the public servant who is Joginder had in some way demitted office, then the person of his co equal rank could have filed it. If Joginder was available, under what provision in law he transferred the power to Sandeep Sharma? The petition is limited to maintainability of complaint when officer concerned was available,” she said.

ED's special counsel Zoheb Hossain raised preliminary objection to the maintainability of the plea.

He said that Kejriwal's plea is a second revision petition which has been filed under the garb of Section 482 of CrPC which is barred in law. He also contended that the grounds raised in the petition were identical to the one filed before the trial court.

However, the High Court issued notice in the plea and listed it for hearing next on December 19.

Kejriwal has been granted bail in both ED and CBI cases connected to the liquor policy case.

The AAP chief was formally arrested by CBI on June 26, while he was in custody of the Enforcement Directorate in the money laundering case.

Case Title: Arvind Kejriwal v. ED

Tags:    

Similar News