Former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has moved Delhi High Court against maintainability of the criminal complaints filed by Enforcement Directorate (ED) against him for skipping its summons in the Delhi excise policy case.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri asked the ED to respond to Kejriwal's plea, which also challenges the trial court decision to take cognizance of the central agency's complaints.
"Would you like to respond? File a reply," the Court told the counsel representing ED, while listing the matter for next hearing on December 19.
The Court refused to entertain Kejriwal's request to stay the trial at this stage.
Senior Advocate Rebecca M John earlier submitted that while summons under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) were issued by one ED officer, the complaint under Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was filed by a different person.
"My plea is limited to the very maintainability of a complaint ... when the officer concerned was available. The officer concerned is appearing and yet not filing the complaint," John submitted.
John argued that under the relevant law, the complaint has to be filed by the 'public servant' concerned - the officer who issued PMLA summons in the case.
Advocate Zoheb Hossain, representing the ED, objected to maintainability of the plea.
Earlier this year, the ED had moved a court in Delhi against Kejriwal for not complying with its summons in the Delhi excise policy case.
This was before he was arrested by the ED. Since then, he has been released on interim bail by the Supreme Court.
The complaint cases under Section 174 of the IPC were filed for non-attendance in compliance with Section 50 of the PMLA which lays down powers of ED regarding summons, production of documents etc.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) Divya Malhotra of the Rouse Avenue Courts in February and March summoned Kejriwal in the complaint cases.
A Sessions Court later refused to stay the ACMM's summons to Kejriwal.
On September 17, the Sessions Court rejected Kejriwal's plea against orders by which the trial court had taken cognizance of the ED complaint under Section 174 of IPC and summoned Kejriwal.
It is against this decision Kejriwal has now moved the High Court.
The money laundering case in which Kejriwal was summoned by the ED stems from alleged irregularities in the framing of the now-scrapped Delhi excise policy of 2021-22.
The case involves allegations that several Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders including Kejriwal were involved in deliberately leaving loopholes in the excise policy in exchange for kickbacks from liquor lobbies.
The investigation agencies have alleged that the funds garnered from this exercise were used to fund the AAP's election campaign in Goa.
The case is being probed by both the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the ED.
Kejriwal was arrested by the ED on March 21. He was briefly released on interim bail by the Supreme Court to campaign for the 2024 Lok Sabha polls before returning to prison on June 2.
While he remained in custody in the ED case, the CBI also formally arrested him on June 26, in a move that Kejriwal's lawyers termed an "insurance arrest" to make sure he stays in jail if he is granted bail in the ED case.
The Supreme Court on July 12 granted him interim bail in the ED case. On September 13, he was granted bail in the CBI case as well by the top court.
He was then released from prison.
Following his release from the prison, Kejriwal resigned as the Delhi CM. His party is currently preparing for the upcoming Assembly elections in the national capital.'