The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday told the Delhi High Court that it has the official sanction required under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to prosecute former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the money laundering case related to allegations of corruption in implementation of Delhi Excise Policy, 2021-22
The submission was made by Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta before Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri.
The single-judge was hearing Kejriwal's plea challenging the trial court's order to take cognizance of the supplementary prosecution complaint naming him as an accused.
Section 197 of CrPC lays down that prior sanction of the government would be required to prosecute a person accused of an offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting act in the discharge of his official duty, and no court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction.
The SG said that the sanction would be placed on record. However, Kejriwal's counsel said the sanction was not on record before the trial court.
"Let me file an affidavit," Mehta said.
Senior Advocate N Hariharan with Advocate Vivek Jain represented Kejriwal, and placed reliance on the Supreme Court's recent decision in Enforcement Directorate v. Bibhu Prasad Acharya to argue that cognisance could not have been taken by the trial court without prosecution sanction.
"When the supplementary prosecution complaint was filed, there was no sanction which was there," Hariharan said.
Considering the SG's statement, Justice Ohri said the Court would grant him time to place on record the affidavit.
Accordingly, the Court proceeded to issue notice on Kejriwal's petition and listed the matter for further consideration on December 20.
Earlier, the Court had decided to adjourn the matter to February, 2025. However, Kejriwal's counsel insisted for an early hearing.
"Not possible. The Court has enough load," Justice Ohri said.
Senior Advocate Hariharan said the Court should then stay the proceedings before the trial court. There is no sanction to prosecute Kejriwal, the senior counsel said.
"How does the trial court assume jurisdiction without the sanction," asked Senior Advocate Hariharan.
When the Court announced that the case would be heard next on January 20, Senior Advocate Hariharan urged the Bench to pass an order on the application seeking stay on the trial.
Amid opposition by the SG who called it a "threat" to carry the matter to the Supreme Court, the Court said the matter would be heard next on December 20.
Senior Advocate Hariharan insisted that the SG's statement was contrary to record.
"How can we threaten anybody," he said in response to SG's remark.
The money laundering case under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) against Kejriwal and other Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders stems from alleged irregularities in the framing of the now-scrapped Delhi excise policy of 2021-22.
The case involves allegations that several AAP leaders including Kejriwal were involved in deliberately leaving loopholes in the excise policy in exchange for kickbacks from liquor companies.
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, Kejriwal resigned as the Delhi Chief Minister.
Senior Advocate Rebecca John also appeared for Kejriwal.