NEW DELHI: Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Saturday filed his response to the Enforcement Directorate’s affidavit in the Supreme Court, saying that there is no proof that AAP received funds or advanced kickbacks in connection with the ongoing probe into the liquor policy case. In his reply, the AAP chief stated that the mode, manner, and timing of his arrest just before when the schedule of the Lok Sabha elections 2024 was announced and the Model Code of Conduct had come into force speaks volumes about the arbitrariness of the ED.
The jailed Delhi Chief Minister further claimed that there exists no proof or material demonstrating that the AAP received funds or advanced kickbacks from the South group, let alone utilising them in the Goa election campaign.
“Not a single rupee was traced back to the AAP, and the allegations put forth in this regard are devoid of any tangible evidence, rendering them vague, baseless without any corroboration,” Arvind Kejriwal said in his affidavit.
Delhi Liquor policy case: Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal files his response on the ED’s affidavit in the Supreme Court, and says that the mode, manner, and timing of his arrest just before when the schedule of the Lok Sabha elections had been announced and the Model Code of…
— ANI (@ANI) April 27, 2024
Kejriwal also accused the Enforcement Directorate (ED) of acting in a “most highhanded manner” in a money-laundering case stemming from the alleged excise policy scam. In a rejoinder to the ED’s reply affidavit filed on his petition challenging his arrest in the case, Kejriwal said he has always cooperated with the investigation.
The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor said the ED, in its reply affidavit filed in the apex court, has said that one of the reasons which necessitated his arrest was that he did not remain present before the investigating officer (IO) despite being summoned nine times.
Kejriwal said the ED has said in its reply that in such a case, the IO was justified in forming an opinion that custodial interrogation would lead to “a qualitatively more elicitation orientated” questioning of the accused.
“The aforementioned tenor, text and contents of the reply leave no manner of doubt that the ED has acted in a most highhanded manner in a gross affront to the due process of law,” he said.
Kejriwal further claimed that a cumulative reading of the ED’s stand in its reply would expose the “bogey and blatant falsehood” in the conduct of its proceedings. The AAP supremo said the record would reveal that each and every summons issued to him was duly responded to while seeking vital details and information, which under no circumstances can be claimed to be privileged or confidential by the ED.
Kejriwal claimed that the ED has never spelt out the alleged non-cooperation by him. “What was the requirement in not calling the petitioner (Kejriwal) either through an authorised agent or seeking information or documents from him in writing or through a virtual mode and insisting on his presence physically in person, is not forthcoming,” he said.
Kejriwal maintained that his plea deserves to be allowed and he is entitled to be released forthwith.
