Delhi HC refuses to stay trial court proceedings against Kejriwal in ED case

The Enforcement Directorate had filed a case against Arvind Kejriwal for allegedly disobeying the summons issued by the agency in the Delhi excise policy case

The Delhi high court on Tuesday refused to immediately stay the trial court proceedings against former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal in a case filed by Enforcement Directorate (ED) against him for allegedly disobeying the summons issued by the agency in the Delhi excise policy case.

Arvind Kejriwal. (Arvind Yadav/HT Photo)

A bench of justice Manoj Kumar Ohri refused to halt the proceedings saying that the AAP supremo had approached the court, two months after the sessions court had rejected his plea for quashing the summons issued by the magisterial court in the case.

“It’s 17/09 order. It’s not a fresh order. You’re approaching after 2 months. I’m issuing notice on the petition as well as the application,” justice Ohri said to senior advocate Rebecca John who appeared for the AAP supremo.

The court was responding to AAP supremo’s plea challenging city court’s September 17 order, rejecting his request of quashing the summons issued to him by the magisterial court in a complaint filed by ED. ED had filed two complaints on February 3 and March 6 against Kejriwal seeking initiation of prosecution under section 174 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), for not appearing before the investigators despite repeated summons issued to him under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), before arresting him in March. Under section 174 of the IPC, the person not appearing on the summons issued by a public servant shall be punished with imprisonment up to one month and a fine of ₹500. The ED, in its complaint, submitted that he has no legal right to know whether he is being summoned as a witness or an accused in the Delhi excise policy case and blamed him for intentionally omitting to obey ED’s summons and for raising “frivolous” objections.

Additional chief metropolitan magistrate (ACMM) Divya Malhotra took cognisance of both the complaints filed by the agency and issued summons to Kejriwal to appear before the court in February and March, against which he had approached the sessions court.

However, on September 17, the sessions court had dismissed the petitions saying that there did not appear to be any incorrectness, illegality or impropriety in the order passed by the magisterial court directing him to appear before it.

In his petition before the high court, the AAP chief challenged the maintainability of the ED’s complaint, saying that though the summonses were issued to him by one ED officer of assistant director rank and the criminal complaint was filed by another, of the same rank. The plea went on to add that the same was barred by law.

The ED represented by special counsel Zoheb Hossain raised objections regarding the maintainability of Kejriwal’s petition. He said that the plea was a second revision petition which was filed under the garb of Section 482 of CrPC and the same was barred in law and the grounds raised in this petition were identical to the one filed before the trial court.

Considering the contentions, the court sought ED’s response and fixed December 19 as the next date of hearing.

The AAP Supremo was arrested by the ED on March 21 and by the Central Bureau of Investigation on June 26, after a sequence of dramatic developments in court.

On July 12, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the ED case, acknowledging that he has spent over 90 days in incarceration and in the CBI case on September 12, reiterating that bail is the rule, and jail an exception.

The case against the CM stems from allegations of irregularities in Delhi’s now-scrapped excise policy of 2021-22, which the CBI began probing following a recommendation by Delhi’s lieutenant governor in July 2022.