The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday informed the Delhi High Court that it intends to challenge the acquittal of former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal in cases relating to his alleged failure to comply with summons issued in connection with the liquor policy investigation.
Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju made the submission before a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia.
Plea Against Summons Withdrawn
The development arose during hearing of a petition filed by Kejriwal challenging the summons issued by the ED. Counsel for Kejriwal sought permission to withdraw the plea, stating that he did not wish to pursue it further in view of his acquittal in the cases registered for non-appearance before the agency.
The Bench allowed the request and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
Trial Court Acquittal
On January 22, the trial court acquitted Kejriwal in the complaints filed by the ED alleging that he had failed to comply with summons issued in the money laundering case linked to the Delhi excise policy.
The ED had alleged wilful non-compliance by Kejriwal in response to summons requiring him to join the investigation. The agency had filed two criminal complaints against him on this ground.
Kejriwal did not appear pursuant to summons dated November 2 and December 21, 2023, as well as January 3 and January 18, 2024. He had described the summons as “illegal.”
Arrest and Bail Proceedings
The ED arrested Kejriwal on March 21, 2024. Subsequently, on June 20, 2024, vacation judge Niyay Bindu of the Rouse Avenue Courts granted him bail. However, on a challenge by the ED, the Delhi High Court stayed the operation of the bail order.
In July 2024, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Kejriwal and referred his petition challenging the legality of his arrest by the ED to a larger Bench.
Allegations in Excise Policy Case
According to the ED, the excise policy was framed as part of a conspiracy to confer a 12 percent wholesale profit margin upon certain private entities, despite the absence of such a stipulation in the minutes of meetings of the Group of Ministers (GoM).
The agency has further alleged that the conspiracy involved coordination by Vijay Nair and other individuals along with the “South Group” to secure extraordinary profit margins for wholesalers. The ED claims that Nair acted on behalf of Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia.
The matter is titled Arvind Kejriwal v. ED.
