States & UTs

    CBI alleges Kejriwal deliberately gave evasive replies, court sends him to judicial custody till July 12

    The Hawk
    June29/ 2024
    Last Updated:

    Allegations include the unexplained increase in profit margins for wholesalers under the new excise policy and the use of illicit funds in elections.

    Arvind Kejriwal

    New Delhi: The Rouse Avenue Court of Delhi on Saturday sent Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal to judicial custody till July 12 in connection with the excise policy case.
    The Vacation Judge Sunena Sharma sent Arvind Kejriwal to judicial custody till July 12, 2024.
    Advocate DP Singh appeared for CBI while seeking direction to send Arvind Kejriwal into Judicial Custody and alleged that during the police custody remand, the accused Arvind Kejriwal been examined/ interrogated. However, he did not cooperate with the investigation and deliberately gave evasive replies contrary to the evidence on record.
    On being confronted with the evidence, he did not give a proper and truthful explanation regarding the enhancement of the profit margin for wholesalers from 5 per cent to 12 per cent under the new Excise Policy of Delhi 2021-22, without any study or justification, said CBI.
    He also could not explain as to why during the peak of 2nd wave of Covid, the Cabinet approval for a revised Excise Policy was obtained through circulation in hurried manner within 01 day, when the accused persons of the South Group were camping in Delhi and holding meetings with his close associate Vijay Nair.
    He evaded the questions regarding the meetings of his associate Vijay Nair with various stakeholders of the liquor business in Delhi and demanded illegal gratification from them for favorable provisions in the upcoming Excise Policy, CBI added.
    He also evaded questions regarding the transfer and utilization of ill-gotten money to the tune of Rs.44.54 crores in the Goa Assembly Elections by his party during 2021-22, said CBI.

    Also Read:'s-arrest-gopal-rai-atishi-participates 

    In the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances, the further custodial interrogation of the accused Arvind Kejriwal is not required at this stage, said CBI.
    CBI alleged that he was deliberately and intentionally evading the just and relevant questions related to the case. He, being a prominent politician and Chief Minister of Delhi, is a very influential person, as such, there are credible reasons to believe that, he may influence the witnesses and evidence already exposed before him during the custodial interrogation and also the potential witnesses, who are yet to be examined, tamper with the evidence to be further collected and may hamper the ongoing investigation, CBI added.
    Earlier the Vacation Judge on June 26 had sent Arvind Kejriwal into 3 days Custodial Remand of CBI.
    On Saturday, Kejriwal was produced by CBI at the end of their remand period. Sunita Kejriwal, Sanjay Singh, Dilip Pandey, Samantha Bharti, Saurabh Bharadwaj, and Madan Lal were present in the courtroom.
    On the last date of the hearing, Arvind Kejriwal himself addressed the court and said, "CBI is claiming that I have made a statement against Manish Sisodia which is completely false. Manish Sisodia Nirdosh hai, Aam Aadmi Party Nirdosh hai aur main bhi nirdosh hun. Iss Tarah ke statements hamme media me badnam Karne ke liye diye ja rahe hai."
    He also added that "CBI sources ke hawale se media me hamme badnam kar rahe rahe hai. Inka plan hai ki media front page ye chala de ki Kejriwal ne sara thikra Manish Sisodia pe daal diya."
    However, the Court said, "apki statement maine pad liya hai... apne aisa nahi bola hai."
    Appearing for CBI, DP Singh on the last date, submitted that there are certain dates...I got permission under the PC Act on 23rd April 2024 and since the election was on and then he was on interim bail, we refrained from investigating him. Vijay Nair a close confidant of CM, the media in charge of AAP is given the responsibility to coordinate.
    CBI counsel further alleged that on May 25, 2021 policy was notified. Before this first attempt was made to meet the liquor baron. The policy wasn't yet notified. But the process of finding suitors started?
    K Kavitha and Magunta Reddy met together and again in March 2021 itself K Kavitha called Reddy and then met. Even though lockdown happened, these meetings started and on a private flight, a team from the South came to Delhi during prime COVID. Boinpally sends a report through Nair to Sisodia...C Arvind, the Secy of Sisodia, types the report and it was given in his camp office (CM), said CBI in court.
    The GoM report was prepared by the South Group, the said report goes to the LG office. 4 chargesheets have been filed, 17 accused persons, we're almost on the conclusion of the investigation, said CBI
    Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhari appeared for Arvind Kejriwal opposed the remand application moved by CBI and said CBI has filed four chargesheets till now and now arresting me and it still has to identify some persons through me. Is this a valid reason for arrest?
    Kejriwal's lawyer further added that, according to CBI I gave evasive replies during my examination/Interrogation in Tihar jail. The investigation officer of the case called it evasive because the only reply they want is my admission of guilt.
    Chaudhri questions the timing of the arrest: They were waiting for the pronouncement of my bail order. They could've arrested me on June 2 when I surrendered. The materials must be perused by the Court before granting them (the CBI) the custody of Kejriwal.
    On Tuesday CBI arrested the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor Kejriwal after the Vacation Judge of the Delhi Court allowed CBI to examine/interrogate him in the courtroom so that the agency could proceed with his formal arrest.
    The court also asked the CBI to place on record the material that they have for his arrest.
    The Delhi High Court on recently stayed Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's bail order passed by the trial court, saying that the trial court should have at least recorded its satisfaction with the fulfillment of twin conditions of section 45 of Prevention of the Money Laundering Act (PMLA) before passing the impugned order.