In a significant ruling, a Delhi court has granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, asserting that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) acted with bias and lacked direct evidence linking him to the alleged proceeds of crime in the excise policy case. This decision underscores the judiciary’s stance on ensuring that arrests are substantiated with solid evidence rather than assumptions or indirect implications.
Case Background
Arvind Kejriwal was arrested in connection with the Delhi liquor policy scam, with the ED alleging that he was the kingpin behind the scheme that allowed for kickbacks and corrupt practices. The ED sought a 10-day custody, arguing that Kejriwal was directly involved in framing the now-withdrawn liquor policy to facilitate bribes. They presented evidence that indicated connections between Kejriwal and other key figures in the case, including former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and Vijay Nair, AAP’s former communication head【224†source】【225†source】.
Court’s Observations
The court, however, found the ED’s claims insufficient. It noted that the agency failed to provide direct evidence proving that Kejriwal personally handled or benefited from the proceeds of crime. Kejriwal’s defense, led by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, argued that the ED’s actions were driven by bias, highlighting that a significant number of statements did not name Kejriwal as involved in the conspiracy. The court emphasized that the power of arrest must be exercised judiciously and not merely because the agency possesses such power【224†source】【226†source】.
Legal Implications
This ruling reinforces the importance of evidence-based judicial processes and safeguards against potential misuse of investigative powers by agencies. It also sets a precedent for future cases, emphasizing that courts will scrutinize the motives and evidence presented by investigative bodies before endorsing arrests, especially of high-profile individuals.