The Delhi High Court issued a fresh notice to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal on Wednesday regarding the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) appeals against his acquittal in two summons cases. These cases stem from allegations that Kejriwal failed to appear before the agency despite multiple summonses linked to the excise policy investigation.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma noted that previous notices sent to Kejriwal were not served, prompting a fresh notice. The ED’s counsel highlighted that a notice had been issued on April 1 but there had been no representation on Kejriwal’s behalf. “Registry reports that (he is) not served. I will issue fresh notice. Respondent has not been served,” the judge stated, scheduling the hearing for July 22.
The ED contends that Kejriwal intentionally disobeyed the summons, raising frivolous objections that impeded the investigation. According to the ED, the trial court erred in acquitting Kejriwal, as it did not refute the fact that summons had been duly issued and received.
During earlier proceedings, the ED’s counsel asserted that the trial court committed a “grave error” in its decision. The trial court had ruled on January 22 that the ED failed to prove that Kejriwal intentionally disobeyed the summons. Furthermore, it stated, “Neither the service of summons through emails has been proved by the ED nor the process of issuing summons to any person 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The ED claims that other accused individuals communicated with Kejriwal regarding the now-repealed excise policy, which allegedly led to unwarranted benefits for them and kickbacks to the AAP.
Kejriwal currently remains on interim bail concerning this money laundering case. The Supreme Court referred questions regarding the necessity and circumstances of arrest under the PMLA to a larger bench for further scrutiny.
It is significant to note that on February 27, the trial court dismissed charges against Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and 21 others involved in the liquor policy case. The court concluded that the CBI’s case lacked substantial evidence to withstand judicial examination and stood discredited.
The ongoing plea by the CBI contesting this discharge remains pending in the high court.
