The Aryavarth Express
Agency(New Delhi): The Enforcement Directorate (ED) presented its justification to the Supreme Court for the arrest of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, arguing that his non-cooperative behavior during the investigation into a money laundering case necessitated his detention. This response came as part of an affidavit filed against Kejriwal’s petition challenging his arrest.
According to the ED, Kejriwal’s conduct led the investigating officer to conclude that his arrest was essential. The affidavit stated that Kejriwal avoided appearing for interrogation despite receiving nine summonses, and his responses during questioning were evasive and non-cooperative, even on straightforward, non-incriminating queries.
The agency further elaborated that three different judicial authorities had reviewed the materials justifying his arrest, thereby granting judicial approval to the process. The Supreme Court had earlier asked the ED to respond to Kejriwal’s appeal, which contests the legality of his arrest during an ongoing investigation, with the prosecution complaint yet to be filed.
The ED refuted allegations of malicious intent (“mala fide”) in the arrest, asserting that the action was taken in good faith and was a necessary part of the investigation process. They emphasized that the nature of Kejriwal’s non-cooperation made it impossible to confront him with evidence, which further supported the need for custodial interrogation to facilitate more effective questioning.
AAP responded sharply to the ED’s claims, accusing the agency of being a “machine for telling lies” and acting under the influence of the BJP to fabricate charges against Kejriwal.
The arrest stemmed from allegations of corruption and money laundering related to the Delhi government’s excise policy for 2021-22, which has since been scrapped. The Delhi High Court has upheld the legality of the arrest, noting Kejriwal’s repeated failure to comply with summonses and join the investigation left the ED with limited options.
This legal battle highlights the ongoing tension between the AAP-led Delhi government and federal investigative agencies, as political and legal narratives continue to intertwine in this high-profile case.