NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has issued a notice on a plea by former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, challenging a trial court’s decision to take cognizance of a prosecution complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the excise policy case. Kejriwal has also sought a stay on the trial court proceedings.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the ED, informed the court that the sanction to prosecute Kejriwal had been obtained. Mehta assured the court that the sanction would be formally submitted through an affidavit.
Senior Advocate Hariharan, appearing on behalf of Kejriwal, questioned the scope of the sanction, asking whether it pertained to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or the ED matter. Hariharan asserted that no sanction had been granted for the ED’s prosecution of Kejriwal. Senior Advocate Rebecca John also appeared for the former Chief Minister.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court reinstates criminal proceedings against former Kerala minister Antony Raju
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri directed the ED to file an affidavit under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to verify the status of the sanction for prosecuting Kejriwal. The next hearing has been scheduled for December 20, 2024.
In his petition, Kejriwal has challenged the trial court’s cognizance of the ED’s prosecution complaint, arguing that the required sanction for prosecution is absent. Additionally, the plea requests a stay on the ongoing proceedings in the trial court.
The excise policy case has been a point of contention, with the ED alleging irregularities and corruption linked to Kejriwal’s administration. The former Chief Minister, however, has consistently denied the charges, framing them as politically motivated attempts to tarnish his image.
ALSO READ: Delhi High Court directs inclusion of arrest grounds in memo forms
This case remains a focal point in Delhi’s political and legal landscape as Kejriwal’s legal team continues to push back against what they deem procedural lapses in the ED’s prosecution. The upcoming hearing is expected to clarify the court’s stance on the validity of the sanction and the broader implications for the case.