Kejriwal returns to Supreme Court.
Arvind Kejriwal’s counsel to raise Liquor Policy Case before Chief Justice Chandrachud at 10.30 am.
A day after the Delhi High Court rejected his petition contesting his arrest in the liquor policy case, Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal turned to the Supreme Court today. His counsel, from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), approached Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, seeking an urgent hearing. The Chief Justice, without confirming a hearing today, stated, “We will see, we will look into it.”
The high court, in its ruling yesterday, dismissed Mr. Kejriwal’s challenge to his March 21st arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The court emphasized that the central agency had “little option” due to the AAP leader’s repeated disregard of summonses in the money laundering case. Additionally, it referenced the ED’s claim that Mr. Kejriwal played an active role in utilizing and concealing alleged proceeds of crime.
The recent developments surrounding the Delhi liquor policy case have sparked significant debate and controversy, particularly following the Delhi High Court’s dismissal of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s petition challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The court’s decision, coupled with statements from various parties involved, has shed light on the complexities of legal proceedings involving public figures and the powers of investigative agencies.
In response to the court’s ruling, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma emphasized that there should be no distinct protocol for the questioning of a common citizen versus that of a Chief Minister. The court’s stance was clear: there should not be a dual system of laws, one for ordinary citizens and another granting special privileges to individuals holding public office.
These remarks underscore the principle of equality before the law, emphasizing that no individual, regardless of their position, should be immune from scrutiny or investigation by law enforcement agencies. The court’s decision appears to reinforce the idea that the responsibilities and obligations of public office should not shield individuals from legal consequences.
However, the response from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and Delhi Minister, Saurabh Bharadwaj, adds another layer of complexity to the case. Bharadwaj highlighted that despite extensive searches conducted by the ED and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with the liquor policy case, no illegal funds were discovered. “They are talking about crores,” Bharadwaj remarked, “But ED and CBI have not found even a rupee of illegal money.”
Bharadwaj’s comments suggest a discrepancy between the allegations made by the investigative agencies and the evidence presented during their searches. He further alleged that witnesses were pressured to alter their statements to align with the ED’s agenda. “Witnesses have been pressured to change their statements and say what ED wants them to,” Bharadwaj claimed.
This aspect of the case raises questions about the integrity of the investigation and the potential for undue influence on witnesses. Bharadwaj’s assertion that the issue transcends mere allegations of money laundering, describing it as “the biggest political conspiracy in India’s history,” adds a layer of gravity to the situation.
As the legal battle continues, it is clear that the Delhi liquor policy case has broader implications beyond the allegations of financial impropriety. It touches on the fundamental principles of governance, transparency, and accountability within the Indian political landscape. The differing perspectives presented by the court’s judgment and Bharadwaj’s statements highlight the multifaceted nature of this case, leaving room for further examination and debate.
In the ongoing saga of the Delhi liquor policy case, AAP leader and Delhi Minister Saurabh Bharadwaj highlighted the contrasting outcomes in the judiciary for individuals involved. Bharadwaj pointed out that the Delhi High Court denied relief to AAP MP Sanjay Singh on similar grounds, yet the Supreme Court granted him bail.
This development comes after Mr. Kejriwal initially approached the Supreme Court following his arrest, only to withdraw the petition later and opt to pursue the matter in the trial court. On the same day, the Supreme Court bench also refused relief to Bharat Rashtra Samithi leader K Kavitha, another accused in the liquor policy case. The top court stated its inability to bypass protocol and directed Ms. Kavitha to approach the trial court.
Now, eighteen days following a setback in court, Mr. Kejriwal has returned to the Supreme Court seeking relief.
The controversy surrounds the Delhi government’s liquor policy, implemented in 2021 and subsequently revoked the following year, allegedly providing undue benefits to liquor licensees. Following a recommendation by Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) initiated an investigation into the accusations of irregularities. Concurrently, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is probing the money trail associated with the case. Alongside Mr. Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister and senior AAP leader Manish Sisodia is currently incarcerated in connection with the case. Meanwhile, AAP MP Sanjay Singh, also arrested in the same case, has been granted bail.