Liquor policy case: No interim relief for Kejriwal; HC to hear matter on April 3

Singhvi also questioned how a person can be arrested for non-cooperation with enquiry. According to him,  four exculpatory statements made in Kejriwal’s favour were classified by ED as unreliable. However, two statements made against him in 2023 paved the way for his arrest.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, who appeared for ED, contended that Kejriwal's legal team had served him a copy of the petition only in the afternoon of March 26 and he requires time to file a detailed response to the plea. Raju further contended that ED had sent two emails asking for a copy of the plea, however they got no response from Kejriwal's legal team.

The court, on hearing both the parties, informed that an order would be uploaded in the court's website by evening.

In its order the court said "This Court remains conscious of the fact that to reach a conclusion as to whether the petitioner (Kejriwal) herein is entitled to immediate release or not, this Court will necessarily have to decide the issues raised in the main petition, as those issues are the edifice of arguments of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner seeking immediate release of the petitioner ."

Furthermore the court noted that it is duty bound to hear
both sides fairly keeping in mind the principles of natural justice. Thus,
the ED's reply is essential and crucial to decide the case, it therefore rejected Singhvi's argument that no reply is required to be filed by ED.

Kejriwal's arrest

On March 21, hours after the Delhi High Court refused to protect Kejriwal from arrest, the ED arrested him in the Delhi liquor policy case. Though the Delhi CM moved the Supreme Court challenging his arrest, he withdrew it after deciding to challenge his remand by the ED.

A day later, a Delhi court remanded Kejriwal to ED custody till March 28.

During the hearing at Delhi's Rouse Avenue Court, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, who appeared for ED contended that Kejriwal was the key conspirator in the alleged irregularities in the scrapped Delhi excise policy 2021-22. Raju said, "He was directly involved in the formulation of the policy and was involved in the handling of proceeds of crime."

The ED also contended that Kejriwal did not turn up for enquiry when summonses were issued to him and was also non-cooperative, thus sought for his remand.

Kejriwal was represented by three senior lawyers. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who opened the arguments for Kejriwal, argued that there was no direct evidence linking Kejriwal to the alleged irregularities except for some witness statements. He said, "There is no direct evidence except these statements saying I met Mr Kejriwal, etc." According to Singhvi, if these witnesses were pardoned they would not name Kejriwal.

Singhvi also said that these attempts were being made to deter AAP's chances in the upcoming elections. "Four senior leaders of his party are arrested. There will be no level playing field," he said. Singhvi also stated that there was no necessity to arrest Kejriwal specifically in March 2024. He said, "In your grounds of arrest, there is no ground to arrest me".