Arvind Kejriwal Bail Plea: Delhi CM’s Legal Team Registers Strong Objection to ED Affidavit Opposing Interim Relief in Supreme Court
The ED repeatedly objected to their bail, they made statements implicating Shri Arvind Kejriwal, they were granted bail/pardon without the ED objecting to it. All the statements where there is no allegation against Shri Arvind Kejriwal were deliberately ignored by the ED.
New Delhi, May 9: The legal team of Delhi Chief Minister and AAP National Convenor, Shri Arvind Kejriwal, has raised strong objection to the affidavit filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) opposing interim bail in the Supreme Court. A formal complaint has been lodged his with the Supreme Court's registry denouncing the ED's affidavit as a blatant disregard of legal procedures, especially considering that the matter is already slated for a final decision in the SC tomorrow and the affidavit was submitted without taking the SC's approval.
Questioning the ED's objection to the interim bail of CM Arvind Kejriwal, the AAP said that it is well known that even after two years of investigation by ED in the alleged liquor scam, not a single rupee or piece of evidence has been recovered incriminating anybody in Aam Aadmi Party. Arvind Kejriwal Bail Hearing: ED in Supreme Court Opposes Interim Bail to Delhi CM, Says Electioneering Not Fundamental Right.
Further, the grounds of arrest of Shri Arvind Kejriwal are based on statements made by other implicated persons viz. Magunta Sreenivasulu Reddy, Sarath Reddy, Satya Vijay Naik, and a close aide of an ex-BJP CM. The ED has relied solely on the statements of these accused turned witnesses with direct links to and benefitting from the BJP.
For instance, Magunta Sreenivasulu Reddy, who received an NDA Lok Sabha ticket, gave a statement to facilitate the bail of his son, Raghav Reddy. Another approver, P. Sarath Reddy, sent ₹60 crores to the BJP's account through electoral bonds to secure his own bail. A third person, Satya Vijay Naik, who fought 2022 Goa assembly elections on the AAP ticket, is closely associated with Goa CM Pramod
Sawant and fought on the BJP ticket in 2012 and 2017. Another accused turned approver was a close aide of former BJP CM Manohar Parrikar. Thus, all 4 incriminating statements are from persons closely linked to the BJP. Arvind Kejriwal Bail Hearing: Supreme Court To Pass Order on Interim Bail to Delhi CM on May 10 in Excise Policy Scam.
The AAP further added that these statements indicate a pattern: These persons were arrested, they made multiple statements which did not implicate Shri Arvind Kejriwal. The ED repeatedly objected to their bail, they made statements implicating Shri Arvind Kejriwal, they were granted bail/pardon without the ED objecting to it. All the statements where there is no allegation against Shri Arvind Kejriwal were deliberately ignored by the ED.
“Some of these statements do not even indicate the commission of money laundering or any predicate offence. All of the evidence against Shri Arvind Kejriwal as shown in the Grounds of Arrest have come after the arrest of all these people, leading to a suspicion that the arrest has been systematically used as a device to coerce statements against Shri Arvind Kejriwal,” the AAP shared.
The AAP mentioned that the ED illegally 'picked up' a sitting Chief Minister and the National Convenor of a national party on 21.03.2024, that is, 5 days after the General Elections were announced and the Model Code of Conduct was put in place. The AAP is in direct opposition to the ruling BJP at the Centre in the ongoing General Elections and voting had already commenced from 17.04.2024. During an election cycle when political activity is at its peak, Shri Arvind Kejriwal's illegal arrest has caused grave prejudice to the AAP and will provide the BJP at the Centre an unjust upper hand in the ongoing elections. A level playing field, which is a prerequisite for 'free and fair elections', has clearly been compromised with the illegal arrest of Shri Arvind Kejriwal.
The party stated that the ED has not only been opaque and dictatorial in its approach but also guilty of suggestio falsi (suggesting falsehood) and suppressio veri (suppressing truth). Shri Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest constitutes an unprecedented assault on the tenets of democracy based on 'free and fair elections' and 'federalism' both of which form significant constituents of the basic structure of the Constitution. The ED abused its power of arrest in the middle of general election and while relying on the same material as was in possession months before his arrest.
The AAP further detailed that there is no material to show the involvement of any AAP leader in the process or activity related to POC, be it one of concealment, possession, acquisition, use of proceeds of crime as much as projecting it as untainted property or claiming it to be so. There is no proof that the AAP received any funds from “South Group”. The ED in its counter affidavit filed before the High Court has already admitted that Shri Arvind Kejriwal was not involved in handling the transfer of any amounts.
The AAP shared that the ED has categorically stated in their reply filed in these proceedings, that Shri Arvind Kejriwal is not named as an accused in the ECIR; nor is he named as an accused in the scheduled offence registered by the CBI, which is the foundation of the proceedings in the ECIR. The power to arrest in this case is a glaring abuse of the due process of law as well as the procedure established. The ED's approach completely negates the basic tenets and foundation principles of criminal jurisprudence, that is, fair investigation, fair trial and rule of law.