HC refuses to stay ED case against Kejriwal

The Delhi High Court on Thursday refused to stay for now the proceedings against former CM and AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal in a money laundering case linked to purported irregularities in the state Excise Policy 2021-22.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri issued notice and sought the response of the Enforcement Directorate on a plea by the former Delhi Chief Minister challenging a trial court’s order taking cognisance of a chargesheet in the case.

The matter will be heard on December 20.

Kejriwal sought setting aside of the trial court order and argued that cognisance of the chargesheet was taken by the special court in the absence of the required sanction for his prosecution as he was a public servant when the alleged offence was committed.

However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, submitted a sanction was obtained to prosecute Kejriwal and he would be filing an affidavit.

Kejriwal’s counsel said the relevant document was not supplied to them along with the supplementary chargesheet and claimed there was no sanction at the time of filing of the final report.

The AAP convener’s lawyer sought an early hearing after the court posted the hearing in January 2025 and insisted an order on his plea for a stay on the proceedings be passed during the day owing to urgency.

Mehta opposed the submission and sought to file a reply to the stay application, pointing out such an approach was unfair. He said this was a kind of “threat” on the part of the petitioner to carry the matter to the Supreme Court.

Kejriwal’s lawyer responded asking how could they “threaten anybody”.

The court, which said an early date was not possible as there was “enough load”, posted the matter on December 20.

Kejriwal's counsel also urged the high court to exempt the leader from appearing before the trial court, scheduled to hear the money laundering case on December 3.

Justice Ohri remarked such a request could be made by the petitioner to the trial court and not before him.

During the hearing, Kejriwal’s counsel contended the seventh supplementary chargesheet filed by the ED naming Kejriwal as an accused was the “verbatim” repetition of the sixth supplementary chargesheet.

He said it was filed without any new material collected during investigation and even the witnesses were the same in both chargesheets.

Mehta objected to the submission saying it was factually incorrect and further investigation was conducted by the ED.

Apart from seeking to set aside the trial court’s July 9 order taking cognisance of the chargesheet, Kejriwal sought quashing of all proceedings in the case.

The plea contended that the prosecution of Kejriwal was bad in the eyes of law as it was without obtaining the mandatory sanctions under Section 197 of the CrPC despite the allegations pertaining to the official acts performed by him.

The high court refused to stay the trial court proceedings at the moment in the criminal case.