On May 16, the Supreme Court questioned the Enforcement Directorate (ED) about allegedly disregarding statements that favored Arvind Kejriwal while arresting him based on adverse statements from the same individuals.
Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Deepankar Datta considered whether the court should examine these aspects before making a decision. They noted that a proper conclusion could only be reached by understanding both the statements made for and against the accused. Kejriwal claimed that the statements against him were coerced by the ED from Magunta Srinivas Reddy (an MP from Andhra Pradesh), his son Raghav Magunta, and Aurobindo Pharma Director Sarath Reddy, who did not initially implicate him. He also alleged that these individuals were granted bail shortly after making statements against him.
The ED, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional SG SV Raju, argued that Kejriwal’s arrest was constitutionally valid and that his plea was not maintainable. Mehta contended that the trial court, not the constitutional court, should determine if Kejriwal’s arrest complied with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) 2002. He warned that allowing the plea could encourage litigants to bypass trial courts. Mehta further argued that Kejriwal’s plea resembled conducting a mini trial in the Supreme Court, which the court has entertained in past high-profile cases. He also noted that Kejriwal had not objected to the orders remanding him to custody.
The SG rejected allegations of excessive arrests by the ED, stating that only 313 arrests had been made since 2022. ASG Raju emphasized that the ED is required to state reasons for arrests but not the merits or demerits of those reasons.
The court will continue hearing the case on May 17. This case is being closely followed as Kejriwal’s arrest has become a significant political issue, with AAP accusing the BJP of using probe agencies for political vendetta, while the BJP alleges corruption within AAP.
On May 10, the court granted Kejriwal interim bail until June 1 to campaign for the ongoing Lok Sabha elections but denied his request for bail until June 4, requiring him to surrender by June 2. Kejriwal, who has been in Tihar Jail since March 21, was also restricted from visiting the Chief Minister’s office and the Delhi Secretariat.
Kejriwal appealed against a Delhi High Court order that upheld his arrest, arguing that the ED’s evidence implicated him in using the proceeds of crime. The case’s outcome is particularly significant as AAP, part of the Congress-led INDIA opposition bloc, is contesting seats in the upcoming elections.
