Never blamed Manish Sisodia; CBI making statements for headlines: Arvind Kejriwal opposes CBI custody

A Delhi court on Wednesday reserved its order on a plea by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seeking custody of Aam Aam Aadmi (AAP) chief and Delhi Chief Minister (CM) Arvind Kejriwal in connection with the Delhi excise policy case. .Judge Amitabh Rawat of the Delhi Rouse Avenue Court heard the CBI and Kejriwal at length before reserving its order.The CBI had earlier today formally arrested Kejriwal after judge Rawat declined to interfere with the probe. The CBI then sought custody of Kejriwal for five days.During the hearing today, Kejriwal addressed the Court in person and maintained that he and other AAP leaders including Manish Sisodia who have been implicated in the case, are innocent.He also rebutted the CBI's claim that Kejriwal had shifted the entire blame on Manish Sisodia."Maine aesa koi bayan nahi diya hai ki Manish Sisodia doshi hai. Manish Sisodia nirdosh hai, AAP nirdosh hai, main nirdosh hu. Unka saara plan hai hame media main badnaam karne ka. CBI k sources n chalwaya... Inke saare aarop jhhute hain (I have never testified that Manish Sisodia is guilty. Manish Sisodia is innocent, AAP is innocent, I am innocent. Their aim is to malign us through media. CBI has activated its 'sources'. All their claims are false)," he said. He alleged that the CBI's objective is to ensure that media headlines are manipulated to reflect that Kejriwal has put the entire blame on Sisodia."Inka idea ye hai ki kal front page pe top headline honi chahiye ki Kejriwal n saara theekra Manish Sisodia pe foda. They are sensationalising the issue. Ye kal top headline hogi har akhbaar me. Inka aaj kewal ye maqsad hi hai (Their idea is to ensure that front page headlines should be 'Kejriwal has put all blame on Manish Sisodia. They want this headline in all newspapers. That is their sole aim)," Kejriwal said.The Court too agreed with Kejriwal and said that Kejriwal had not stated what the CBI was attributing to him."Apki statement maine padh li hai, aapne aesa nahi kaha hai (I read your statement. You have not said what CBI has claimed (on Sisodia)," the judge said.Kejriwal then explained what he had said in his statement to the CBI."Maine kaha tha 3 objectives hain excise policy ke. Hame revenue badhana tha aur jo lambi lines lagti hain wo khatam karni hain aur equitable distribution... Maine Manish Sisodia ko bula ke ye 3 directions diye the. They asked ki privatisation kiska idea tha? I said, mera idea nahi tha," the Delhi CM stated."Media picks up one line. It is very difficult to control media that way," the Court remarked while reserving its order..The CBI's counsel asserted today that custodial interrogation of Kejriwal was necessary for the central agency's probe into the alleged irregularities in the framing of the now-scrapped Delhi excise policy of 2021-22. Representing the CBI, advocate DP Singh said, "We (CBI) need his (Kejriwal's) custodial interrogation... He (Kejriwal) pushed the entire onus on Manish Sisodia and said he has no idea about the excise policy. We need to confront him with documents that we have... We are not asking him to admit to something."Singh added that Kejriwal has not been forthcoming so far in his answers to the CBI's queries made prior to his formal arrest earlier today. "When we asked, 'did you go to Goa and who paid for your stay?', he says, he 'doesn't remember.' His stay was paid for through hawala money... He goes there (to Goa) 11 times and says I have no recollection. This did not happen 10 years back," Singh argued. The CBI counsel also justified the timing of Kejriwal's arrest by the central agency, in response to a query by the court. "Supreme Court was considering his interim bail for elections. It shows my restraint. I didn't arrest him when he was canvassing for elections," Singh said..Meanwhile, the CBI's actions were vehemently objected to by Kejriwal's counsel. Representing Kejriwal, senior advocate Vikram Chaudhari asked whether there was any necessity to make the arrest at all. "Many years back, Justice Krishna Iyer asked who will police the police? When people did not trust police, the case was referred to CBI. Today, the question is who will CBI the CBI? There are 4 chargesheets till now. In none of them there is even a reference to me (Kejriwal). I am on the timing today. My essential arguments are necessity to arrest coupled with the timing of arrest. This is a classic case of abuse of power," Chaudhari argued. He further queried as to whether there was any change of circumstances for the CBI to seek Kejriwal's arrest today."I have been granted bail by the Special Court on June 20, 2024 (now stayed on High Court's order). When did you make me an accused? From 160 CrPC to an accused? What has changed? How it has changed? There is nothing mentioned here. Why do you require me now? Why were they waiting? They (CBI) say they didn't want to arrest me in May because they didn't want to overreach the Supreme Court order of interim bail. They are doing exactly that today," Chaudhari contended. Chaudhari also questioned the independence of the CBI. "They want to see that I remain in custody. Are these independent agencies or are they playing to gallery? I am saying, if this man was really guilty and deserved to be arrested, why did they not arrest him (before)? This is a sham and the biggest abuse of the process of law," Chaudhari argued. Supporting Chaurdhari's contentions, advocate Vivek Jain added,"What changed? There is only one earth-shattering event that happened and that is the only thing that has changed. It is that I have been granted bail in the PMLA case. Same arguments were made in Manish Sisodia's case as well. Mr Manish Sisodia chargesheet has already been filed. If you are relying on the same evidence, how are you arresting me now? This shows mala fide.".Background.Kejriwal was first arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on March 21, 2024, in a money laundering case linked to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam.Kejriwal is accused of being a key conspirator in a plot to intentionally leave loopholes in the liquor policy to benefit certain liquor sellers. The ED had alleged that the kickbacks received for leaving behind these loopholes were used by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to fund its elections in Goa. The ED's case had stemmed from a case registered by the CBI on a complaint by Delhi Lieutenant Governor, VK Saxena. Kejriwal remained in jail after his March 21 arrest by the ED, until a May 10 order by the Supreme Court allowing him interim bail to campaign for the now-concluded Lok Sabha elections. He returned to jail on June 2 and remained in prison since then.Kejriwal was in judicial custody at Tihar jail when the CBI took a statement from him earlier this week with the court's permission.He was produced before the trial court this morning when the CBI sought to formally arrest him. After a brief hearing before a Delhi trial court, the CBI formally arrested Kejriwal in the case earlier today, following which the court was informed of the grounds for his arrest. .Hearing today.During the remand hearing today, the CBI's counsel, advocate DP Singh, took the court through the alleged case against Kejriwal. "We have a statement that a person met Kejriwal in relation with the Delhi excise policy. This happened even before the policy was formulated. We have statement of Magunta Reddy (approver) in this regard ... We have evidence to show that the South Group said what the policy should be like. If you see the sequence, the haste with which notification was done. This happened when the COVID pandemic was at its prime. Who was at the helm of affairs? It is the Chief Minister," advocate DP Singh submitted. Singh further alleged that while the AAP-led government invited public comments on the proposed liquor policy, the comments received were fabricated."We have evidence to show that these were AAP members making the comments ... The comments were fabricated and are by AAP members only. They (government) did not want to deal with the comments by the (former) Chief Justices of India and Rohatgi (Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi)," Singh said. Commenting on the alleged influence of liquor lobbies in the framing of this liquor policy, Singh added:"The South Group came to Delhi during COVID by private plane when no planes were operating. The report prepared at the instance of South Group was taken to the government and that report became the policy itself. The profit margin was increased from 5% to 12%. There were certain vendors who were not allowed to participate, but following the tweaks (to the policy), they were allowed to participate."Singh went on to assert that the CBI has obtained a statement to indicate that Kejriwal met with Magunta Reddy (now an approver) who was assured support in the liquor business if funds were given to the AAP. Magunta Reddy is a big player in the South liquor lobby group, Singh told the court. .Kejriwal's counsel countered that it was improper of the CBI to rely on statements by Magunta Reddy to implicate Kejriwal. "Mr. Magunta Reddy confessed to passing the bribe but the CBI is judge, jury and executioner so they declare him a witness. His son was an accused and turned an approved in the PMLA case. In this case (CBI case) also he turned approver. One more qualification of Mr Magunta Reddy is that he has joined the allies of the present ruling party (BJP) on 29 February 2024 and all sins have been washed off," senior advocate Vikram Chaudhari argued. He added that the CBI only has vague statements to support its application for remand. "Whatever material they are relying upon to seek my remand is prior information. Any kind of jugglery of words... They chose to maintain an eery silence," Chaudhari said. Chaudhari also denied the CBI's claim that Kejriwal has not cooperated with the CBI's probe. "Even non-cooperation is not a ground of arrest. He says I am evasive... He wanted to examine me as an accused, if I am an accused, I have a right to remain silent now," Chaudhari contended.Advocate Vivek Jain addressed the CBI's allegations regarding the manner in which the excise policy was green light"They (CBI) talk about opinions. How many opinions came? More than 14000 opinions came and their allegation is that 7 opinions were fabricated. How do I know all this? Because everything has been argued in the Manish Sisodia case. 0.06% of opinions are allegedly fabricated. And what is my role? I did not even hold the portfolio then. The opinions of two CJIs and Mr Rohatgi (on the excise policy) has nothing to do with Mr Kejriwal. Finance, law and excise departments - everyone was consulted. Minister's view was taken and thereafter the cabinet approved. It was sent to the LG's office. The file was with LG for one month. He suggested some changes. The changes were put before the cabinet, the cabinet approved the changes and then the policy was made," Jain said. Jain added that the CBI's case against Kejriwal was laughable and Magunta Reddy's statements were far from believable."How can you believe this person who says I did not discuss anything about liquor policy and then turns around and levels allegations against me? This is laughable. It actually shows mala fide and abuse of process. You are abusing your powers of arrest," Jain said.