Delhi High Court today dismissed Arvind Kejriwal’s plea against arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the liquor scam case.
The court opined that ‘Kejriwal played an active role in concealing’.
The bench asserted that ‘doubting or casting aspersions on the statements of an approver is tantamount to undermining the integrity of the judicial process itself’.
Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest
Arvind Kejriwal was arrested by the ED on the 21st of March in the liquor policy scam case. Earlier Manish Sisodia, Deputy Chief Minister was also arrested in this case. Delhi’s Rouse Avenue court remanded him to ED’s custody and later on April 1st, he was sent to judicial custody.
Today, Arvind Kejriwal again requested his release but was rejected by the Delhi High Court because the case was “valid”.
What did the Delhi High Court say?
- Arvind Kejriwal’s questions on approvers: Against Kejriwal’s accusations of questioning the legitimacy of the approvers, the bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma asserted that “doubting or casting aspersions on the statements of an approver is tantamount to undermining the integrity of the judicial process itself”.The court also reiterated that “law concerning approvers is not a recent enactment but rather has endured for over a century, serving as a vital mechanism for justice”.
- Why arrest before elections? : When Kejriwal questioned why he was arrested before the arrest, the court said, “Petitioner has been arrested in a money laundering case and the court has to examine his arrest and remand as per law, irrespective of the timing of the elections.”
- The rationale behind the arrest: When discussing the rationale behind the arrest, the Court referred to previous legal precedents and affirmed that sufficient material existed to justify the arrest of Kejriwal. “Non-joining of investigation by Kejriwal, delay caused by him was also impacting those in judicial custody,” the court added.
- Were the actions politically motivated? – the court rejected any comments that interject political considerations in legal proceedings. They emphasized that the realm of the judiciary is only interpreting the law and asserted that “while politics may influence governance, it has no place within the judiciary, which must remain independent and impartial”.
Thus, the court rejected Arvind Kejriwal’s plea stating that the arrest was valid. Arvind Kejriwal after the judgement has decided to move to the Supreme Court.
Comments 1