BREAKING| Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal Approaches Supreme Court Against CBI Arrest In Liquor Policy Case

Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party chief Arvind Kejriwal has approached the Supreme Court challenging his arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation in the Delhi Liquor Policy case.

Kejriwal's latest petition before the Supreme Court challenges the Delhi High Court order of August 5, whereby his plea against CBI arrest was dismissed by a single judge bench, with liberty to approach the trial Court for bail.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi mentioned the matter today before the Chief Justice of India for urgent listing. CJI DY Chandrachud said that he wil examine the e-mail request and assign a date.

The AAP chief was formally arrested by CBI on June 26, 2024, while he was in custody of the Enforcement Directorate in the money laundering case arising out of the alleged liquor policy scam. 

Weeks later, on July 12, the Supreme Court granted Kejriwal interim bail in the money laundering case. However, he continued to remain in judicial custody due to his arrest by the CBI.

Challenging the CBI arrest and seeking bail, Kejriwal moved the Delhi High Court. On August 5, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed his plea challenging CBI arrest, but insofar as bail was concerned, liberty was given to approach the trial Court.

Aggrieved by the High Court order, Kejriwal approached the Supreme Court. The petition is filed through Advocate-on-Record Vivek Jain.

It may be recalled that on July 12, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the money laundering case, while referring his petition challenging ED arrest to a larger bench. More particularly, the bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta referred to the larger bench the question whether the need or necessity of arrest must be read as a condition into Section 19 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

CBI Case: Proceedings before the Delhi HC

Sr Adv Dr AM Singhvi, appearing for Kejriwal, called the CBI arrest an “insurance arrest” and argued that it was an afterthought to the interim bail granted by the Supreme Court in the ED case on May 10.

He further contended that the liquor policy was not only signed by Kejriwal, but also by then LG Anil Baijal, and going by that logic, the former LG and the bureaucrats involved in the process also ought to be made accused. “[They're] trying to catch me by presumptions and hypothesis,” Singhvi said.

The senior counsel also emphasized that despite the top Court's grant of interim bail in the ED case, Kejriwal was back to square one because of the insurance arrest. “Because those who want it, by hook or by crook, he is behind bars,” he commented.

On the other hand, CBI Special Public Prosecutor DP Singh argued that Kejriwal was the “sutradhar” of the “entire scam” and there was direct evidence to show his involvement. He further pleaded that the trial court has already given a finding that the arrest was not illegal and thus, the probe agency has passed the stage of legality of arrest in the court below.

Singh also submitted that mere filing of the CBI chargesheet against Kejriwal did not entitle him to bail. In this regard, it was mentioned that bail was denied to co-accused Manish Sisodia and K Kavitha even though chargesheet had been filed against them.

It was further Singh's case that use of the term 'insurance arrest' was not justified. The SPP argued that multiple petitions and applications were filed before the court, yet till date, there were no observations regarding any violations by CBI.

Background

Kejriwal was arrested by ED on March 21, after the Delhi High Court refused to grant him interim protection earlier in the day. He remained in custody thereafter, until the Supreme Court granted him the benefit of interim release (for the purposes of Lok Sabha elections) on May 10. The same expired on June 2.

The Delhi CM had initially approached the Delhi High Court challenging ED's arrest. However, his plea was dismissed on April 9. Aggrieved by the same, he moved the top Court, which issued notice on his plea on April 15.

The eventful hearings in the case witnessed Singhvi lead arguments on behalf of Kejriwal. Besides questioning the necessity and timing of the leader's arrest, the senior counsel alleged that ED withheld material favoring him.

Throughout the proceedings, ED's case remained that there was "direct" evidence to show that Kejriwal demanded Rs. 100 crores, which went to AAP for Goa election expenses. It was further asserted that apart from vicarious liability as the head of AAP, Kejriwal was also directly liable as the person who played a key role in formulating the excise policy.

At the time when the parties were heard on the question of interim bail to Kejriwal, the bench questioned ED's timing of arrest, noting that the ECIR was registered in August, 2022, but Kejriwal came to be arrested about 1.5 years later (before elections). Ultimately, the interim relief was granted and Kejriwal temporarily released from jail.

Thereafter, on June 20, the Delhi CM came to be granted bail in the ED case by a Delhi Court, based on a view that ED failed to give any direct evidence against him in respect of the proceeds of crime.

This order was stayed by the Delhi High Court on June 25, with an observation that the Vacation Judge passed it without going through ED's entire material and the same reflected “perversity”. On the very same day, CBI arrested Kejriwal in connection with the liquor policy case.

On July 9, a Delhi Court took cognizance of the 7th supplementary prosecution complaint filed by ED, which names Kejriwal and the Aam Aadmi Party.

On July 12, Kejriwal was granted interim bail by Supreme Court in the ED case, while his petition challenging arrest was referred to a larger bench to examine the question whether the need or necessity of arrest must be read as a condition into Section 19 PMLA.