The Delhi High Court issued a fresh notice to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal on Wednesday. This notice comes in response to the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) plea challenging Kejriwal’s acquittal in two separate cases. These cases involve allegations that he failed to appear before the agency despite multiple summonses linked to the excise policy.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma acknowledged that the initial notice sent to Kejriwal did not reach him. According to court records, the earlier notice issued on April 1 remained unserved as no one represented his interests.
The ED’s counsel informed the court that no appearance had been made on Kejriwal’s behalf. Justice Sharma remarked, “Registry reports that (he is) not served. I will issue fresh notice. Respondent has not been served.” The court subsequently scheduled a hearing for July 22.
The cases arise from the ED’s complaint, asserting that as the then chief minister, Kejriwal intentionally disobeyed the summons by failing to participate in the investigation. The ED further alleged that he raised trivial objections to avoid attending the probe.
In earlier submissions to the high court, the ED’s counsel criticized the trial court’s decision as a significant error, stating that Kejriwal’s non-appearance contradicted the fact that proper summons had been issued and received. The trial court had previously acquitted Kejriwal, determining that the ED did not sufficiently prove intentional disobedience of the summons.
The trial court, in its January 22 ruling, declared, “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 case involves allegations linking Kejriwal to other accused individuals with respect to formulating a questionable excise policy, purportedly leading to improper benefits and kickbacks to the AAP.
At present, Kejriwal remains on interim bail in the ongoing money laundering case. The Supreme Court has referred questions regarding the necessity for arrest under the PMLA to a larger bench for thorough examination.
The trial court had earlier discharged Kejriwal along with former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia and 21 others in the liquor policy case on February 27, citing a lack of substantial evidence from the CBI. The court described the CBI’s case as unable to withstand judicial scrutiny.
As legal proceedings continue, Kejriwal’s case demonstrates the complexities surrounding political and legal accountability in India. The outcome of the current appeal by the ED against the discharge order remains pending in the high court, adding another chapter to this contentious legal saga.