Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.
Arvind Kejriwal - Petitioner
Versus
Directorate Of Enforcement - Respondent
W.P.(CRL) 985 of 2024 & CRL.M.A. 9427 of 2024
Decided on : 09-04-2024
JUDGEMENT :
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.
| EXORDIUM |
| INDEX TO THE JUDGMENT FACTUAL BACKGROUND |
| SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF SH. ARVIND KEJRIWAL |
| SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT |
| ISSUES IN QUESTION |
| RELEVANT LAW UNDER PMLA TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES IN QUESTION |
| The Power To Arrest Under PMLA |
| i. Section 19 of PMLA |
| ii. Ingredients of Section 19 of PMLA |
| iii. Judicial Precedents Qua Exercise of Power Under Section 19 of PMLA |
| JURISPRUDENCE OF REMAND UNDER CRIMINAL LAW |
| Power of Remand underSection 167 of Cr.P.C. |
| Remand in cases under PMLA |
| ANALYSIS & FINDINGS |
| I. MATERIAL AGAINST THE PETITIONER COLLECTED BY THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT |
| The Role of Petitioner in Formulation of Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22 |
| The Role of Petitioner in Demanding Kickbacks & Petitioner’s Meetings with the South Liquor Lobby |
| Petitioner’s Association with Co-accused Vijay Nair |
| Role of Petitioner, as National Convenor of Aam Aadmi Party, in Utilisation of Proceeds of Crime |
| Applicability of Section 70 of PMLA |
| Proceeds of Crime |
| II. ARGUMENT REGARDING STATEMENTS OF WITNESSES AND APPROVERS BEING UNRELIABLE AND UNTRUSTWORTHY |
| Significance of a Statement Recorded under Section 50 of PMLA |
| Can the Statement of an Approver be Brushed Aside at the Stage of Arrest and Remand of an Accused? |
| III. WHETHER THE ARREST OF THE PETITIONER IS IN VIOLATION OF DIRECTIONS OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF PANKAJ BANSAL VS. UNION OF INDIA? |
| Contention regarding there being no fresh material collected by the respondent since October, 2023 |
| IV. WHETHER THE REMAND ORDER DATED 22.03.2024 HAS BEEN PASSED IN MECHANICAL AND ROUTINE MANNER? |
| Why was Remand Sought by the Directorate of Enforcement and Remand Granted by the Special Court in this Case? |
| V. TIMING OF ARREST VIS-A-VIS THE CONDUCT OF PETITIONER OF NOT JOINING INVESTIGATION FOR SIX MONTHS DESPITE SERVICE OF 09 SUMMONS |
| Conduct of the Petitioner |
| Replying to Summons issued under Section 50 of PMLA cannot amount to Joining Investigation |
| Whether Petitioner was entitled to Special Privileges for the purpose of complying with Summons issued under Section 50 of PMLA? |
| Timing of Arrest and the Argument of Level Playing Field |
| Was there any Necessity to Arrest the Petitioner? |
| i. Impact of Non-joining of Investigation by the Petitioner on the Trial of Co-accused Persons |
| ii. Not Joining Investigation as a Contributory Factor |
| CONCLUSION |
| The State is static, the Governments are at the will of the People. |
| State is an Entity and Not Confined to a Person |
| Courts are concerned with Constitutional Morality and not Political Morality |
| The Decision |
| EXORDIUM |
1. On 21.03.2024, a search was conducted by the Directorate of Enforcement at the official residence of Sh. Arvind Kejriwal, petitioner herein, who is the Chief Minister of the State of Delhi. After the search, he was served with grounds of arrest and was arrested on the same day at 09:05 PM by the Directorate of Enforcement in connection with ECIR No. HIU-II/14/2022 regarding his involvement in the offence of money laundering with regard to Delhi Excise Policy 2021-2022. After arrest, petitioner was produced before the learned Special Judge (PC Act) CBI-09 (MP/MLA Cases), Rouse Avenue Courts, Delhi (‘learned Special Court’), where the Directorate of Enforcement had sought his custody for the purpose of interrogation which was granted vide order dated 22.03.2024.
2. During the hearing of the present case, this Court was informed that after filing of the present petition, the learned Special Court was pleased to further extend remand of the petitioner to custody of the respondent vide another order dated 28.03.2024 till 01.04.2024. The present petition came up for hearing before this Court initially on 27.03.2024 when the petitioner was running in custody of the Directorate of Enforcement by a judicial order. The Court is informed that the petitioner herein has now been remanded to judicial custody by the learned Special Court vide order dated 01.04.2024 till 15.04.2024.
3. The present petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of Ind
The court upheld the legality of the arrest and remand of the petitioner under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with legal procedures and the petitioner....
(1) Delhi liquor scam – Arrest of petitioner Arvind Kejriwal, Chief Minister of State of Delhi is not illegal.(2) Law of approver is more than 100 years old – It is Court of law that evaluates credib....
(1) Legality of arrest – Power to arrest is fenced with preconditions and requirements, which must be satisfied prior to arrest of a person.(2) Legality of arrest – Delhi liquor scam – Special Court ....
The court emphasized that for bail under PMLA, satisfaction of twin conditions is mandatory, confirming the need for reasonable grounds against guilt and potential for re-offense. Balancing the sever....
The court upheld the legality of the petitioner's arrest under the PMLA, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with statutory safeguards and the scope of judicial review.
The court upheld the legality of the arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, confirming compliance with statutory requirements, including timely communication of grounds for arrest.
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 as there were no reasonable grounds for believing that she had committed an off....
The court emphasized that in economic offences, especially under the PMLA, bail should not be granted unless the accused demonstrates they are not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The court ruled that the arrest of the petitioner was unlawful due to insufficient evidence linking him to illegal mining, which is not a scheduled offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Ac....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
