The Delhi High Court on Thursday 19 March granted time to AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and other accused to respond to the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) plea seeking removal of adverse observations made by a trial court in the excise policy case.
Background of the Case
The controversy stems from a February 27 order of a Special Court, which discharged 23 accused persons, including prominent political leaders, in the alleged excise policy corruption case. While doing so, the court made strong observations about the role of investigative agencies like the ED and CBI, particularly in matters related to election funding and expenditure.
Read also:- Snake Venom Case: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against YouTuber Elvish Yadav
The ED has now approached the High Court, arguing that these remarks were made without giving it a chance to be heard and go beyond the scope of the case.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma heard the matter and allowed time to the accused persons to file their replies after their counsel sought additional time, citing the need to review extensive documents.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the ED, opposed the request and argued that the accused were attempting to delay proceedings.
The judge, however, noted,
“You need one more week, you take one more week,” acknowledging the request while indicating that the court would proceed thereafter.
Read also:- Bombay HC Dismisses Decades-Old Salt Land Suit as ‘Infructuous’ After Lease Expiry
The ED contended that the Special Court’s remarks amounted to “judicial overreach” and violated principles of natural justice since the agency was not a party to the proceedings in which those observations were made.
In its plea, the agency stated that such findings, if allowed to stand, could cause “grave and irreparable prejudice” to its ongoing investigations under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
It further argued that the trial court had no occasion to comment on its independent investigation while deciding the CBI case.
Read also:- Booked Under BNS for Old Offence? Telangana HC Says Case Will Continue Under IPC
The Special Court had earlier observed that investigative agencies cannot initiate proceedings solely based on allegations of election funding irregularities. It also noted that criminal law cannot be used to convert political accusations into prosecutable offences without clear evidence of a separate criminal act.
The High Court granted time to the accused to file their responses and listed the matter for further hearing on April 2, clarifying that replies would be considered before passing a final order.
Case TItle:- ED v. Kuldeep Singh & Ors
