Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s quest for an urgent hearing in the Supreme Court was thwarted following the Delhi High Court’s ruling that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) possesses substantial evidence of his involvement in money laundering. The high-stakes legal battle, intertwined with political ramifications, has garnered significant attention.
Less than 24 hours after the Delhi High Court’s rejection of his plea to be released from custody, Kejriwal and his legal team approached the Supreme Court seeking an urgent hearing to challenge the ruling. However, their efforts were met with disappointment as the apex court did not grant an immediate hearing. The urgency was heightened due to the impending closure of the Supreme Court for Eid, prompting Kejriwal’s legal team to seek swift judicial intervention.
Senior counsel Abhishek Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, made a fervent request before Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud for an urgent hearing on the same day. Despite assurances from the CJI to examine the urgency and issue appropriate orders, no intimation was received by Kejriwal’s legal team. A late-night update on the Supreme Court website indicated that the petition is likely to be listed for hearing on April 15, adding to the uncertainty surrounding Kejriwal’s legal battle.
The backdrop of this legal saga traces back to Kejriwal’s arrest by the ED on March 21, stemming from allegations related to money laundering in connection with the Delhi excise policy case. In his plea before the Supreme Court, Kejriwal vehemently portrayed his arrest as a politically motivated move orchestrated by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), highlighting the broader implications for democratic governance and the rule of law in India.
The Delhi High Court’s comprehensive 106-page judgment detailed Kejriwal’s alleged role in devising the Delhi excise policy 2021-22, suggesting kickbacks and manipulation of illicit funds. The court underscored Kejriwal’s repeated non-cooperation with ED summons over six months, weakening his claims of special privilege as chief minister and justifying his arrest as a consequence of such non-cooperation.
Kejriwal’s plea before the Supreme Court not only challenges the legal basis of his arrest but also raises fundamental concerns about the misuse of governmental agencies for political ends. He argues that his arrest, timed closely to the announcement of general elections and the Model Code of Conduct, unfairly advantages the ruling party, compromising the principles of free and fair elections and federalism.
The petition contends that ED’s investigation was marred by irregularities, including the coercion of witnesses and deliberate concealment of exculpatory evidence. Kejriwal vehemently denies any financial impropriety during the Goa elections and challenges the legal grounds for his arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
As the legal battle unfolds, the spotlight remains on the intersection of law, politics, and governance, with Kejriwal’s case symbolizing broader debates about the integrity of democratic institutions and the accountability of law enforcement agencies. The Supreme Court’s upcoming hearing is awaited with bated breath, as it holds the potential to shape the trajectory of this high-profile legal tussle.
Sources By Agencies
