NEW DELHI: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) informed the local court on Saturday that the sanction obtained in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) case against former Delhi Chief Minister and AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal was sufficiently comprehensive to encompass not just offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, but also any other potential violations arising from the same facts.
The ED’s submission came in response to a plea filed by Kejriwal, who claimed he had not been provided a copy of the sanction order related to the ED’s chargesheet in the alleged excise policy scam.
Kejriwal’s petition also referred to a recent Delhi High Court hearing, where the Solicitor General representing the ED had stated that the necessary sanction was secured when the chargesheet was filed.
Special Counsel for the ED, Zoheb Hossain, argued that the broad sanction obtained in the CBI case was adequate for the court to proceed with cognizance of the ED’s prosecution complaint.
Following these submissions, Justice Kaveri Baweja of the Rouse Avenue Court dismissed Kejriwal’s plea. Advocate Mudit Jain, representing Kejriwal, earlier contended that the prosecution documents accompanying the chargesheet lacked the required sanction order, questioning the legality of the court’s cognizance.
In a related development, on November 21 the Delhi HC issued notice on Kejriwal’s plea challenging the trial court’s decision to take cognizance of the ED’s chargesheet.
The bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri refrained from staying the trial proceedings but scheduled a hearing on December 20, 2024, to decide on the plea and the application for a stay.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the ED, opposed Kejriwal’s plea, reiterating that the prosecution was duly sanctioned. The ED claims that the now-scrapped excise policy was manipulated to benefit AAP leaders, alleging kickbacks in exchange for favorable provisions for liquor businesses.
According to the ED, wholesale liquor distribution rights were awarded to private entities with a fixed 12 per cent margin, of which 6% allegedly served as kickbacks to AAP leaders.