05 august 2024 : The allegations of irregularities in Delhi’s excise policy of 2021-22 have led to a case against Kejriwal. The CBI initiated an investigation into the matter after a recommendation by Delhi’s Lieutenant Governor in July 2022.
The Delhi high court on Monday turned down a plea for the release of chief minister Arvind Kejriwal from prison in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) case in connection with the now-scrapped Delhi excise policy.
The arrest, as stated by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, cannot be deemed as unjustifiable or illegal.
The judge has also dismissed the Chief Minister’s bail application, allowing him the opportunity to submit a new petition to the city court.
In July, the AAP leader approached the high court to contest his arrest and subsequent remand by the CBI, seeking bail on the grounds that his arrest was “illegal.” He argued that it violated the guidelines established by the Supreme Court in the case of ‘Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar’ and section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). This section requires the investigating officer to notify the accused individual prior to making an arrest without a warrant. The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Arnesh Kumar case set forth guidelines intended to prevent unnecessary arrests, ensuring that such actions are taken only when absolutely necessary.
The petition further contended that the Delhi court did not adequately assess the necessity of the AAP leader’s arrest and misapplied the law by allowing the CBI to detain him without adhering to the stipulations outlined in section 41 of the CrPC. This provision permits police to arrest individuals only with a warrant or magistrate’s approval when there is a legitimate concern that the individual may commit further offenses or when it is essential for a thorough investigation.
The Chief Minister, represented by senior counsel AM Singhvi, argued that the CBI’s actions constituted an afterthought and a “safeguard” designed to prevent his release in a separate money laundering case linked to the same issue. He emphasized that the investigative agency lacked any new “evidence” or “material” to justify his detention in judicial custody, nearly a year after he had been summoned as a witness by the CBI in April 2023
The senior attorney contended that the investigative agency detained his client based on two “non-existent grounds,” namely, lack of cooperation during the investigation and a statement from Magunta Reddy. “When they came to question me and chose not to arrest me, they possessed the same evidence that led to my arrest a day later. This evidence is six months old, and I am already in the custody of the Enforcement Directorate,” Singhvi stated.
He pointed out that there were three favorable rulings for his client’s release under a more stringent statute, specifically the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). In this context, Singhvi argued that the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) decision to approach the trial court for permission to interrogate and detain the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader was motivated by the agency’s concern that the tide was turning in Kejriwal’s favor in the ED case. He suggested that the CBI aimed to ensure, “by any means necessary,” that the former did not secure his release from custody. Furthermore, he asserted that due to the CBI’s arrest, his client found himself back at square one, despite the Supreme Court’s July 12 ruling granting him interim bail in the ED matter, which recognized that he had already spent over 90 days in detention.
The term “insurance arrest,” as coined by him, is unwarranted. The decision to stay his bail in the ED case was scheduled for June 25. It was only after this ruling was issued that we proceeded with the arrest. If it had been an insurance arrest, I could have apprehended him prior to the High Court’s decision. Such an action would have raised suspicions, but I only executed the arrest after this court issued a complete stay on his bail. The Supreme Court’s order regarding interim release on July 12 was not known to anyone at that time. It was not a tactic, as is often suggested,” stated Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) DP Singh, representing the CBI
Singh contended that the investigative agency detained the Chief Minister in June after obtaining authorization in April 2024 under the Prevention of Corruption Act to prosecute the political leader.
“He is a public official. The Prevention of Corruption Act mandates permissions for investigation under Section 17. To clarify, I received the statement of Magunta Reddy in January, and the sanction in April. The CBI follows a specific procedure. An investigating officer (IO) cannot make decisions independently. It took us three months to gather all the necessary evidence. We were not idle. All actions were taken post-April 23, not before. The delay in obtaining the sanction was due to the fact that he is the CM of Delhi,” Singh emphasized. The legal representative further stated that the agency had valid reasons and substantial evidence to demonstrate that Kejriwal could potentially interfere with and obstruct the investigation. “According to the CrPC, arrests can be made for investigative purposes,” Singh argued.
Kejriwal has been in detention since March 21 after being apprehended by the Enforcement Directorate, with a brief 21-day bail in May granted by the Supreme Court to campaign during the Lok Sabha elections. On July 12, the apex court provided him interim bail in the ED case, recognizing that he had already spent more than 90 days in custody. However, he remained detained due to the separate CBI case.
The allegations against Kejriwal are related to suspected irregularities in the Delhi excise policy of 2021-22, which the CBI initiated investigating following a recommendation by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi in July 2022.
Kejriwal became the third AAP leader arrested in connection with this case, following former Deputy CM Manish Sisodia in February 2023, and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh, who was eventually granted bail by the Supreme Court in April after six months in custody.