Arvind Kejriwal moves Delhi HC against CBI arrest in excise policy case

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has moved the high court to challenge his recent arrest and subsequent judicial remand by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) concerning the Delhi excise policy.

The AAP supremo was remanded to judicial custody until July 12 on allegations related to a liquor policy scam. Following the expiration of his three-day custodial interrogation, the CBI requested a further 14 days of judicial custody.

During a virtual court appearance on June 29, Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhari, representing Kejriwal, presented an application requesting the CBI to disclose all collected materials, including the case diary.

Advocate Rishikesh Kumar said Arvind Kejriwal was produced before the court because his three-day CBI custody ended today. He said that CBI did not seek further police custody; they sought a judicial remand, which we opposed because they have no grounds for a judicial remand. Advocate Kumar said Arvind Kejriwal would be produced before the court on July 12.

Kejriwal was allowed to meet his wife and family in court after the counsel urged the court to permit him to meet them until the order was passed.

Notably, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has been investigating the case from a money laundering perspective. On the other hand, the CBI is probing the case against Kejriwal from the point of view of corruption and bribe-taking by public servants.

The ED arrested the Delhi CM in March on charges of money laundering. These charges pertain to the generation and use of alleged tainted funds. Under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), concealment, possession, acquisition and use of tainted funds, projecting as untainted property, or claiming as untainted property are criminal offences.

In 2022, the CBI registered a Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) case, but Kejriwal was not named in it. However, after a month, the Delhi CM was called for questioning by the CBI. His lawyer cited that he was summoned as a witness and not as an accused.

Till now, the Delhi CM has not been named as an accused in the corruption case but has been linked to the money laundering case. The ED’s argument was that money laundering was a standalone offence that did not depend on the existence of a predicate offence.

(With inputs from agencies)