|
The Rouse Avenue Court on Saturday was informed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) that the sanction obtained in the CBI case is comprehensive/broad enough to cover offences not only under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, but also other potential offences arising from the same facts.
The submission came in response to a plea filed by Delhi's former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who had claimed he had not received a copy of the sanction order in the ED case against him. In his plea, Kejriwal pointed to a recent Delhi High Court hearing, where the Solicitor General representing the ED had stated that the necessary sanction had been obtained when the chargesheet was filed. In its response, the ED's Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain clarified that the sanction obtained in the CBI case was broad enough to cover not just the Prevention of Corruption Act, but also other offences that could arise from the facts and circumstances presented, and was sufficient for the court to take cognizance of the case. After considering the ED's submission, the bench of Justice Kaveri Baweja disposed of Kejriwal's plea. Advocate Mudit Jain, appearing on behalf of Arvind Kejriwal, earlier stated that the documents, both relied upon and unreleased, provided along with the chargesheet did not include any copy of the required sanction. On November 21, 2024 the Delhi High Court issued a notice on Aam Aadmi Party's Chief Arvind Kejriwal's plea challenging the trial court's decision to take cognizance of the Enforcement Directorate's chargesheet against him in the alleged excise policy scam. The bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, however, did not grant any stay on the trial proceedings at this stage. The Court scheduled the matter for hearing on December 20, 2024 to consider arguments on both the stay application and the plea seeking the quashing of the trial court's order. Appearing for the Enforcement Directorate, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta opposed Arvind Kejriwal's plea, asserting that the proper sanction had been obtained when the prosecution complaint (chargesheet) was filed. Former Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal has approached the Delhi High Court, challenging the trial court's decision to take cognizance of the Enforcement Directorate's prosecution complaints in the Excise Policy case, citing lack of sanction. The plea argued that the trial court judge, in the impugned order, erred in taking cognizance of the offence under Section 3 of the PMLA, punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA, without obtaining prior sanction under Section 197(1) of the CrPC for the prosecution of the petitioner. This was particularly relevant as the petitioner, Arvind Kejriwal, was a public servant (the Chief Minister) at the time of the alleged offence. Arvind Kejriwal is currently out on bail in both the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) cases related to the now-scrapped excise policy. According to the Enforcement Directorate (ED), the Excise Policy was deliberately designed with loopholes to benefit AAP leaders and foster cartel formations. The ED accused AAP leaders of receiving kickbacks from liquor businesses in exchange for preferential treatment, including discounts, license fee waivers, and relief during the Covid-19 disruptions. The ED further alleged that the "scam" involved awarding wholesale liquor distribution rights to private entities with a fixed 12pc margin, in return for a 6pc kickback. Additionally, AAP leaders were accused of influencing the outcome of elections in Punjab and Goa in early 2022. (ANI)
|
