The Supreme Court revisited Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s challenge against his arrest in the Delhi liquor policy case, questioning his refusal to provide a statement to the Enforcement Directorate (ED). Justice Sanjiv Khanna, part of the two-judge bench, highlighted, “If you do not go for recording of Section 50 statements, you cannot take the defence that his statement was not recorded.”
Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) empowers ED officials to issue summons and gather evidence. Kejriwal contends his arrest is unlawful and politically motivated, aiming to disrupt the government.
During Monday’s hearing, his counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that arrest requires evidence, not mere suspicion, citing Section 45 of the PMLA. Abhishek Manu Singhvi noted Arvind Kejriwal’s non-appearance despite summons, prompting the bench to question the implications of his absence on the investigation.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi emphasized that non-cooperation cannot justify arrest under the PMLA, highlighting Arvind Kejriwal’s prior cooperation with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The Enforcement Directorate countered, alleging Arvind Kejriwal’s evasion during interrogation and his non-cooperation with Section 17 statements under the PMLA.
Arvind Kejriwal, arrested on March 21 and subsequently held in judicial custody, faces scrutiny over his involvement in the Delhi excise policy, allegedly framed with kickbacks from a liquor lobby. The hearing is scheduled to continue on Tuesday.
For more updates follow our Whatsapp 
and Telegram Channel 
