Delhi HC Issues Fresh Notice to Kejriwal on ED Plea

The Delhi High Court issued a fresh notice to AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal on Wednesday, responding to pleas from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) that challenge his acquittal in two separate cases. These cases allege that Kejriwal did not appear before the agency despite receiving summons related to the excise policy.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma stated that the registry informed her that the previous notice issued to the former chief minister had not been served. The ED’s counsel highlighted that a notice was sent to Kejriwal on April 1, but he did not have anyone appear on his behalf.

“Registry reports that (he is) not served. I will issue fresh notice. Respondent has not been served,” the judge remarked, scheduling the matter for hearing on July 22.

The legal disputes arise from the ED’s complaint submitted to the trial court, arguing that Kejriwal intentionally defied the summons, failing to engage with the investigation. The agency also claimed that the chief minister made frivolous objections, deliberately creating grounds to evade the probe.

In earlier submissions to the high court, the ED’s counsel insisted that the trial court made a significant error when it acquitted Kejriwal, despite the clear evidence that he received the summons and did not attend.

On January 22, the trial court ruled that the ED failed to substantiate the claim that Kejriwal intentionally disobeyed the summons. The court indicated that “Neither the service of summons through emails has been proved by the ED nor the process of issuing summons under Section 50(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) via email has been proved to be in accordance with the law.”

The ED alleges that other individuals implicated in this case were actively collaborating with Kejriwal to formulate the now-revoked excise policy, which allegedly provided them undue benefits along with kickbacks directed to the Aam Aadmi Party.

Kejriwal is currently on interim bail regarding this money laundering investigation. The Supreme Court has referred critical questions about the “need and necessity of arrest” under the PMLA to a larger bench for thorough consideration.

Earlier this year, on February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, along with Sisodia and 21 others in the liquor policy case, asserting that the CBI’s accusations could not withstand judicial scrutiny.

The CBI continues to pursue its plea against this discharge in the high court. The unfolding developments reflect escalating legal hurdles for Kejriwal and his party amid allegations of corruption connected to the unsanctioned excise policy.