1. Delhi High Court reserves judgment on Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest plea.
2. Enforcement Directorate denies arrest linked to polls claim.
3. Kejriwal’s plea argues against disruption of the ‘level playing field’ during elections.
New Delhi, April 03: The Delhi High Court has reserved its judgment on Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea challenging his arrest and remand regarding the capital’s Delhi excise policy.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has refuted Kejriwal’s claims that his arrest during the Lok Sabha elections disrupts the ‘level playing field’ and violates the basic structure.
During the court proceedings, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, representing the ED, argued against Kejriwal’s assertions. Here are ten points raised by the ED in court:
- ASG Raju criticized Kejriwal’s argument that his arrest would infringe on the basic structure. He stated that being a chief minister doesn’t exempt one from arrest for alleged crimes. Raju questioned the notion that one could loot the country with impunity just because elections are approaching.
- The ED expressed a dilemma regarding attaching properties in the case, fearing accusations of bias due to the timing of the elections.
- The investigation against Kejriwal is stated to be in its early stages, contrary to arguments suggesting its completion.
- Raju claimed Kejriwal’s challenge of the arrest is a case of “waiver & acquiescence,” questioning the dual stance of challenging the remand order while seeking court intervention.
- The ED argued that even if previous orders were set aside, Kejriwal’s custody remains based on the latest order, making the challenge an academic exercise.
- The ED asserted that the scam involving ₹100 crore, which deprived the exchequer and the public, is undeniable. It dismissed claims that the ED’s actions are politically motivated.
- Raju argued that Kejriwal, despite portraying himself as a saint, is tactfully involved in the matter, both individually and vicariously.
- The ASG pointed out instances where Kejriwal claimed ignorance regarding financial matters, alleging concealment and strategic evasion.
- The ED emphasized that concealment can take various forms, including transferring money abroad and denying knowledge when questioned.
- Raju informed the court about the existence of evidence such as WhatsApp chats, hawala operation statements, and substantial income tax data, refuting Kejriwal’s assertion of a lack of new material.
Also Read: Pema Khandu Criticizes Congress Over Religious Card in Arunachal LS Polls
The arguments presented by the ED underscore a contentious legal battle, highlighting the complexities surrounding Kejriwal’s arrest and the allegations against him.
