|
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed the plea moved by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal challenging his arrest in excise policy case and observed that political considerations and equations cannot be brought before a Court of law as they are not relevant to the legal proceedings.
The Bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma also stated that this Court is not a conflict between the Central Government and the petitioner, Arvind Kejriwal. Instead, it is a case between the petitioner Arvind Kejriwal and the Directorate of Enforcement. In such legal proceedings, it is crucial for the Court to maintain its focus solely on the legal merits of the case. Political factors or dynamics should not and have never influenced the court's deliberations or decision-making process, said the Court. The role of the Court is to impartially assess the evidence presented and apply the relevant laws to determine the outcome of the case. Any attempt to introduce political considerations into the proceedings would undermine the integrity of the legal process and could compromise the pursuit of justice. Therefore, it is essential for the court to remain vigilant in ensuring that the case is adjudicated based on legal principles and not influenced by extraneous factors, said the bench. The courts have been and are better left untouched by political influences or interferences and their only and sole responsibility and duty is the application of the law enacted by Parliament, which is the will of the people, added the court. Courts, as the custodians of justice, are primarily concerned with only upholding constitutional morality rather than getting into the issue of political morality of the parties, as the issue of political morality is their concern and this Court cannot form any judgment about the same. While concluding the judgment, the Court holds that Judges are bound by law and not by politics. The Court also holds that judgments are driven by legal principles and not political affiliations, said the bench. The conduct of the petitioner, Arvind Kejriwal, in not joining the investigation left little option with the Directorate of Enforcement other than his arrest for the purpose of investigating a pending case, in which other co-accused are in judicial custody, and the investigating agency is also running against time in view of the order of the Supreme Court, vide which it was ordered that the trial in this case should proceed expeditiously, stated the bench. The Court while holding the arrest of the petitioner and the remand order dated March 22, 2024, valid, said that Kejriwal's arrest is not in contravention of Law and remand can't be termed "illegal". The bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma said, ED was in possession of enough material, which had led them to arrest Kejriwal. Non-joining of the investigation by Kejriwal, delay caused by him were also impacting those in judicial custody. The material collected by the Enforcement Directorate reveals that Arvind Kejriwal conspired and was actively involved in the use and concealment of proceeds of crime. The ED case also reveals that he was involved in his personal capacity as well as the convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party. The court further stated that this court is of the opinion that the accused has been arrested and his arrest and remand have to be examined as per law and not as per the timing of elections. Kejriwal's challenge to the timing of arrest before general elections in the absence of any mala fide on part of ED is not sustainable, said the court. Arvind Kejriwal through this plea alleged that the ED has at the time of arrest "failed to establish" that the petitioner is guilty of committing activities stipulated under Section 3, i.e., 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. Kejriwal was arrested on March 21 by the Enforcement Directorate in relation to the excise policy case. The trial court on April 1, sent Arvind Kejriwal to judicial custody till April 15, 2024. ED alleged that the Aam Adami Party (AAP) is the major beneficiary of the proceeds of crime generated in the alleged liquor scam. The agency also claimed that Kejriwal was directly involved in the formation of the excise policy. The case pertains to alleged irregularities and money laundering in framing and implementing the Delhi Excise Policy 2022, which was later scrapped. While Kejriwal was not named in the FIRs registered by the ED or the Central Bureau of Investigation in the Delhi excise policy case, his name first found a mention in the ED's chargesheet, wherein the agency claimed that he allegedly spoke to one of the main accused, Sameer Mahendru, in a video call and asked him to continue working with co-accused and AAP communications-in-charge Vijay Nair. Nair was among the first people to be arrested by the CBI in the case, in 2022. Subsequently, former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh were arrested in connection with the case. The latter, however, was granted bail by the Supreme Court last week. (ANI)
|
