Arrest A Classic Case Of Ruling Party Misusing ED To Crush Political Opponent, No Money Traced To AAP : Arvind Kejriwal To Supreme Court

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has told the Supreme Court that his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the liquor policy case is illegal and constitutes an “unprecedented assault” on the tenets of democracy based on “free and fair elections and federalism.”

Kejriwal, who is presently in judicial custody, has told the Apex Court that the money laundering case is a “classic case” of how the ruling party led central government has misused ED and its wide powers under PMLA to crush its “biggest political opponent”- Aam Aadmi Party and its leaders.

The submissions have been by Kejriwal in his rejoinder to the counter affidavit filed by ED opposing his plea challenging his arrest by the ED.

In his reply, Kejriwal has alleged that ED “illegally picked up” a sitting Chief Minister five days after the General Elections were notified and the Model Code of Conduct was put in place.

“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 on- going elections,” Kejriwal has said.

He has submitted that a level playing field- which is a pre-requisite for 'free and fair elections'- has been compromised with his “illegal arrest.”

ED has alleged that by assisting the formulation of the liquor policy, which allegedly enabled liquor companies to recoup the bribes paid as profits, Kejriwal is "directly and indirectly" involved in the process connected with the "proceeds of crime.”

In his rejoinder, Kejriwal has submitted that the mode, manner and timing of his arrest by ED just before the Lok Sabha elections, when the schedule of the polls had been announced and the Model Code of Conduct had come into play, speaks volumes about the arbitrariness of the central probe agency.

“That in the present case, there is also an issue of ED abusing its power of arrest in the middle of general election and while relying on the same material as was in possession months before its arrest. In such circumstances, the case of the Petitioner is peculiar and grave and warrants urgent intervention of this Hon'ble Court to protect life and liberty of an individual,” Kejriwal has said.

Furthermore, the Chief Minister has said there is not even a single averment alleging the destruction of evidence of any kind by him.

Kejriwal has alleged that ED has coerced witnesses to give statements against him and that the only objective of ED to take action against Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy and his son, Raghav Magunta, was to pressurize and coerce them to falsely implicate the Chief Minister.

“That MSR has now joined TDP and contesting the present Lok Sabha elections on its ticket. That TDP is in alliance with BJP for the present general elections and is a part of NDA,” the response states.

It adds that there is 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,” Kejriwal said.

Kejriwal has approached the Supreme Court challenging the April 9 judgment of the Delhi High Court which rejected his challenge to the ED arrest made on March 21.

Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Pankaj Bansal v.Union of India, it is argued that the arrest by the ED was illegal as there was absolutely no material to justify such a drastic move, especially in the middle of elections. Reliance is placed on Pankaj Bansal to argue that mere skipping of summons cannot be a ground to arrest.

He also questioned the necessity of arrest contending that the the exact quantum of alleged proceeds of crime was neither identified nor available and the money trail had not been identified before arrest.

On April 15, the Supreme Court (bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta) issued notice to the ED on Kejriwal's petition and listed the matter in the week commencing from April 29.

Case Title: ARVIND KEJRIWAL v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT., SLP(Crl) No. 5154/2024