New Delhi:

Making a strong case for his client, senior lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi has said politics is writ large over Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal being arrested both by the Enforcement Directorate and the CBI in the alleged liquor policy scam and that the approach taken by the prosecution is not one that would be adopted by “prosecutors or even persecutors”.

In an exclusive interview with NDTV on Friday, Mr Singhvi also claimed that the CBI taking the AAP chief into custody soon after he was granted bail in the ED case is proof that politics was at play and went on to coin a new term for this: “insurance arrest”. 

The Congress leader’s comments came hours after the Supreme Court granted Mr Kejriwal bail in the case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act being investigated by the ED. The chief minister will, however,  remain in jail because he is yet to get relief in the case filed by the CBI.

When it was pointed out to him that the accused have been arrested by both CBI and the ED in the past, a combative Mr Singhvi said, “You are absolutely right, but just because something happens several times doesn’t make it right.”

“Consider four dates and four facts just for yourself. You don’t need to be a lawyer. The so-called liquor scam starts with documents registered officially in mid-2022. Mr Kejriwal is interrogated for nine hours by the CBI in mid-2023, one year later. He is arrested by the ED in March 2024 after the elections are announced and then arrested by the CBI, when he is already in custody, in June 2024,” he said. 

The senior advocate argued that the main offence in the case was filed by the CBI and the facts and context in the cases by both agencies were similar, raising the question of why there was a need to arrest Mr Kejriwal separately.

“Is he a flight risk, is he running away, is he interfering with witnesses? Why did you need to arrest him in June? This is nothing but mala fide writ large, politics writ large,” he said. 

Pointing out that Mr Kejriwal was questioned for nine hours by the CBI in 2023 and never after that, he claimed the chief minister being taken into custody in June reeked of an “insurance arrest” because the agencies knew that the case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was weak.  

“The CBI case is going on. In fact, we have a stronger case in the CBI case because there’s no flight risk. But the government knows, the prosecutor knows that the process is the punishment. So they’re delaying it, they do an insurance arrest. Now I start a ladder from the bottom, then I go to the high court and Supreme Court and get relief. But you have achieved your purpose. You have prolonged (the stay in jail) by a few weeks… This is not the approach of prosecutors, it is not even the approach of persecutors,” he said.  

Referencing the Supreme Court order, Mr Singhvi said the bench had also stated that mere interrogation cannot be “a need or necessity” for arrest.

New Delhi:

The Supreme Court will today deliver its verdict on Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money-laundering case.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, which reserved its verdict on the plea on May 17, will pronounce the judgment.

Mr Kejriwal, also the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief, was arrested on March 21 by the ED in a money laundering case linked to the alleged Delhi liquor policy scam.

ALSO READ | Arvind Kejriwal Used Part Of “Liquor Scam” Kickbacks, Claims ED, AAP Refutes

He has challenged the April 9 order of the Delhi High Court that had upheld his arrest in the case.

The high court had upheld the 55-year-old politician’s arrest in the case, saying there was no illegality about it and that the central probe agency was left with “little option” after he skipped repeated summonses and refused to join the investigation.

The Supreme Court had on April 15 sought a response from the central probe agency on his plea challenging his arrest.

Arvind Kejriwal was earlier granted 21-day interim bail by the Supreme Court on May 10 to campaign for the Lok Sabha polls. He was directed to surrender on June 2, a day after the last phase of the seven-phased elections was scheduled to end.

He was then granted bail by a trial court in Delhi on June 20 in the case. However, the ED moved the Delhi High Court the next day and contended that the trial court’s order granting him bail was “perverse”, “one-sided” and “wrong-sided” and that the findings were based on irrelevant facts.

The high court on June 21 imposed an interim stay on the trial court’s bail order till the passing of an order on ED’s application for interim relief. The high court on June 25 also passed a detailed order staying the trial court order.

ALSO READ | Victim Of Witch-Hunt, Falsely Implicated: Arvind Kejriwal In Delhi High Court

Five days later, he was arrested by the Central Bureau Of Investigation (CBI) in connection with the corruption case related to the alleged liquor policy scam.

The Delhi Liquor Policy Case

The central probe agencies have claimed that irregularities were committed while modifying the Delhi government’s excise policy for 2021-22 and that undue favours were extended to licence holders.

The Delhi government brought in a new policy for liquor sellers in the national capital in November 2021. The Kejriwal-led government, as part of the new policy, stopped government outlets from selling liquor and allowed private parties to apply for licence to run stores.

It said the policy would help stop black marketing, increase the Delhi government’s revenue, and benefit customers.

The Delhi government, however, later scrapped the new liquor policy and reverted to the old one.

New Delhi:

Actor Jacqueline Fernandez has been summoned by the Enforcement Directorate in a money laundering case involving alleged conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar.

Sukesh Chandrashekhar has been accused of cheating high-profile people including former Fortis Healthcare promoter Shivinder Mohan Singh’s wife Aditi Singh.

The ED had alleged that Sukesh Chandrashekhar used these “proceeds of crime” or illegal money to purchase gifts for Ms Fernandez.

Investigators have said Jacqueline Fernandez knew about Sukesh Chandrasekhar’s involvement in criminal cases and that he was married, but she chose to overlook them and made financial transactions with him.

New Delhi:

The Enforcement Directorate has filed a chargesheet and also attached assets worth more than Rs 4 crore of former Jharkhand rural development minister Alamgir Alam, his ex personal secretary and the aide’s domestic help as part of a money laundering investigation.

In a statement on Saturday, the federal agency said it has issued a provisional attachment order under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) on July 4 against Alamgir Alam, his former PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal, Lal’s wife Reeta Lal and his domestic help Jahangir Alam.

The cumulative value of all these assets recorded under the attachment is Rs 4.42 crore, it said.

A chargesheet against these accused, except Reeta Lal, was also filed before a special PMLA court in Ranchi on Thursday, the agency said.

Alamgir Alam, a Congress politician and former rural development minister, apart from Lal and Jahangir Alam were arrested by the ED in this case.

The ED had raided Sanjeev Kumar Lal and Jahangir Alam on May 6 and recovered a total Rs 32.2 crore from a flat in the name of the latter. The total cash seizure of cash in this case is Rs 37.55 crore apart from a four-wheeler and two-wheeled vehicle each, jewellery and digital devices.

The agency had said the probe pertains to alleged irregularities in the state rural development department that was once headed by Alamgir Alam.

Probe found, the ED claimed, that a “commission of 3.2 per cent of the total tender value is taken from the contractors for tender allocation which is distributed in a mechanised manner from top to bottom in the rural works department, government of Jharkhand which also includes the commission of around 1.5 per cent for the minister (former) Alamgir Alam.” 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Mumbai:

In a development concerning the alleged Rs 25,000-crore Maharashtra State Cooperative Bank (MSCB) scam, the Mumbai police and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) are at loggerheads over the closure report filed before a court here.

The Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the city police on Thursday opposed the central agency’s plea against closing the case, citing that the apex cooperative bank did not suffer any unfair loss due to the purported fraud.

Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar was named as an accused in the original case registered by the EOW.

While the police sought to close the case as they found no significant loss to the bank, the ED intervened, expressing concerns that accepting the closure report would impact their ongoing money laundering investigation linked to the scam.

The ED has already filed prosecution complaints and supplementary chargesheets in the case, emphasising the interconnected nature of the investigations.

The EOW filed a written submission in the court in which they rebuffed the ED’s intervention, noting that a similar plea had been rejected previously by a special court for cases involving MPs and MLAs.

The timeline of events includes the police filing a closure report in September 2020, which was initially accepted by the court.

However, further investigation was initiated in October 2022 based on protest petitions and the ED’s involvement.

The EOW moved to close the case again in March this year, asserting that no unfair losses were incurred by the bank due to the alleged fraud.

The FIR, which followed a High Court order in August 2019, alleged that loans of several thousand crore rupees obtained by sugar cooperatives, spinning mills and other entities from district and cooperative banks were diverted and not repaid.

Lodged under various sections including criminal breach of trust and cheating, the FIR named  NCP leader Ajit Pawar as an accused with over 70 others, who served as directors of the bank during the relevant period.

The allegations outlined a loss of Rs 25,000 crore to the Maharashtra government between 2007 and 2017, pointing to violations of banking regulations and RBI guidelines in loan disbursements to sugar mills and the undervalued sale of defaulting businesses’ assets.

A former judge, appointed as an authorised officer by the cooperative commissioner, concluded “there was no unfair loss to the bank due to the loans given to the factories (sugar mills),” and “the bank was recovering the amount from the factories by legal means”, the closure report said.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

 The Enforcement Directorate on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that the trial court judge was in a “hurry” and did not afford a reasonable opportunity to the prosecutor to oppose Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s bail in a money laundering case linked to the alleged excise scam.

The federal probe agency said the June 20 order of the trial court granting regular bail to Mr Kejriwal was “perverse” for non-compliance of prerequisite mandatory conditions under section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

A vacation bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice SVN Bhatti took on record the Enforcement Directorate’s reply affidavit filed in Mr Kejriwal’s plea challenging the interim stay granted by the Delhi High Court on June 21.

The bench also allowed Mr Kejriwal to withdraw his plea after senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for him, said he would file a substantial appeal as the high court has pronounced the final order on June 25, staying the bail order.

The top court granted liberty to Mr Kejriwal to file the substantial appeal.

In its affidavit, the ED pointed out that section 45 of the PMLA envisages two mandatory conditions — public prosecutor be given the opportunity to oppose bail and where the public prosecutor opposes the bail application, the court has to satisfy itself that there exist reasonable grounds for believing that accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

“In the instant case, it is the specific ground raised by the prosecuting agency with specific and concise averments showing that the judge (of trial court) was in a hurry and did not afford a reasonable opportunity to the Additional Solicitor General to oppose the bail,” it said while seeking to set aside the June 20 order.

The agency said money laundering being a specific and serious offence, the requirements under the PMLA override the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrpC) in case of a grant or refusal of bail.

It added the court considering an application for bail must record its satisfaction which should be based on a belief formed by the court that the accused “is not guilty of such offence”.

“This would necessarily mean an examination of record, investigation papers, complaint filed etc. since it is only on perusal of such record that the court can reach a valid conclusion of the accused being not guilty of the offence of money laundering,” it said.

“If any of the above referred pre-requisite mandatory conditions are not complied with, the order would be in non-compliance of the mandate of section 45 of the Act and would also be perverse only on that ground. The perversity can also be on other grounds other than non-compliance with mandatory conditions,” the agency said.

The ED said it is not a matter of mere contention of the prosecuting agency but an admitted fact that the trial court judge did not examine the record of the case despite specifically requested by the prosecuting agency.

“Admitted part in the impugned order itself prima facie but clearly reflects non-compliance with mandatory conditions stipulated under section 45 of the Act,” it said.

The ED pointed out that during the bail hearing before the trial court on June 20, the Additional Solicitor General SV Raju was continuously asked to cut short his arguments by the trial court judge.

Even the impugned order reflects that the order has been passed hurriedly and admittedly without perusing the record of the case, the ED said.

“It is true that the expression ‘opportunity of hearing’ may not be capable of being defined based upon any particular time limit since it would depend upon the facts of each case

“However, undisputed facts stated in the petition regarding the court requiring the Additional Solicitor General to cut short his arguments and the order itself reflecting the fact that the judge chose not to go into the record shows complete non-compliance with the mandatory prerequisite contained in section 45 of the Act,” it said.

The agency added that all these facts show that even in addition to non-compliance of mandatory conditions under section 45 of the PMLA, the bail order is otherwise perverse both on facts and in law and deserves to be set aside.

Earlier on Wednesday, a Delhi court allowed the CBI to formally arrest Mr Kejriwal in connection with the alleged excise scam.

On Tuesday, the high court stayed the trial court order granting Mr Kejriwal bail in the case and held that the lower court did not “appropriately appreciate” the material placed before it by the Enforcement Directorate.

The AAP leader was arrested on March 21 by the ED and granted regular bail by the trial court on June 20.

In its bail order, the trial court held that prima facie Kejriwal’s guilt was yet to be established and that the ED had failed to furnish direct evidence linking him to the proceeds of crime in the money laundering case.

The excise policy was scrapped in 2022 after the Delhi lieutenant governor ordered a CBI probe into alleged irregularities and corruption involving its formulation and execution.

According to the ED and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), irregularities were committed while modifying the policy and undue favours were extended to the licence holders.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

The ED said on Friday that it seized Rs 19 lakh cash apart from a “large number” of property documents in the name of Benami persons during raids on premises linked to BRS MLA Gudem Mahipal Reddy and his businessman brother Gudem Madhusudan Reddy in and around Hyderabad.

The raids were launched on Thursday at about ten locations as part of a money laundering investigation linked to alleged illegal mining.

The money laundering case stems from an FIR of the Telangana Police against a company Santhosh Sand and Granite Supply located in Patancheru, Hyderabad and promoted by Gudem Madhusudan Reddy.

The premises of G Madhusudan Reddy, G Mahipal Reddy, their company and others were searched, the central agency said in a statement.

The Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) party is headed by former Telangana chief minister K Chandrashekar Rao.

Search operations led to the seizure of “unaccounted” cash of Rs 19 lakh along with a large number of property documents in the names of unrelated persons who are suspected to be “benamis” of the accused persons, the Enforcement Directorate said.

Mobile phones “containing evidence related to cash dealings” were also seized, it said.

Some bank locker keys were recovered and examination of these lockers is expected to furnish more evidence, it said.

The accused firm, according to the ED, was found to have excavated and transported an excess quantity of 11,98,743 CBM of building stone and road metal within the quarry lease permitted area and 10,11,672 CBM of material beyond the permitted area (on encroached government land measuring 4.37 hectares).

In this process, the agency alleged, the accused “illegally amassed” around Rs 300 crore by sale of illegally excavated material and also evaded a royalty amount of Rs 39.08 crore due to the government.

“The sale proceeds of illegally excavated material were deliberately not reported in banking transactions and books of accounts and the transactions were suspected to have been carried out in cash.

“The proceeds of crime in the form of cash were laundered by the accused and were invested in real estate and other activities,” the ED claimed. 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

The Supreme Court on Friday disposed of the petition of former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren seeking interim bail to campaign for the ongoing Lok Sabha elections.

The Supreme Court said that Mr Soren’s interim bail petition should be taken up along with the petition declaring his arrest in a money laundering case as “illegal”, due for hearing on Monday.

The Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) leader was arrested in January by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case linked to an alleged land scam. He had moved the Supreme Court against the Jharkhand High Court order dismissing his application challenging his arrest by the ED and denied bail to him.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for Mr Soren, told a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud that polling for the ongoing Lok Sabha elections in Jharkhand will commence on May 13 and that the JMM leader should be allowed to campaign for his party.

“Hemant Soren was arrested on January 31. We moved the high court on February 4. The high court reserved the judgment on February 28 but did not deliver the judgment. The High Court kept the judgment pending for long,” Mr Sibal said.

“The first phase of election starts in the state on May 13 and so we moved this court under Article 32 of the Constitution, and notice was issued last week. After the notice was issued, the high court delivered the judgment rejecting his plea. Its very unfortunate that rights are being trampled in this fashion,” Mr Sibal had said.

Mr Soren was arrested on January 31 shortly after he resigned as the Jharkhand chief minister. He is currently lodged in judicial custody at the Birsa Munda Central Jail in Ranchi.

The central probe agency has alleged that “huge amounts of proceeds of crime” were generated by Mr Soren through manipulation of official records by showing dummy sellers and purchasers in the guise of forged/bogus documents to acquire huge parcels of land having value in crores of rupees.

Arvind Kejriwal Bail Hearing LIVE Updates:

The Supreme Court is expected to give its verdict today on interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who was arrested in a money laundering case and is seeking a release from jail to campaign for the ongoing Lok Sabha polls.

A bench, comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, had reserved its verdict on Mr Kejriwal’s interim bail on May 7.

Mr Kejriwal, the national convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), was arrested on March 21 by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case linked to the alleged liquor policy scam. He is currently lodged in Tihar jail under judicial custody.

Earlier Tuesday, a Delhi court extended his judicial custody till May 20.

Here are the LIVE updates on Arvind Kejriwal’s bail hearing:

Get NDTV UpdatesTurn on notifications to receive alerts as this story develops.

Arvind Kejriwal’s Interim Bail Live: Probe Agency’s Affidavit In Supreme Court

In its affidavit filed in the Supreme Court on Thursday, the ED pointed out that, while hearing the bail plea of former Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia — a co-accused in the same Delhi liquor policy case — the court had said that the laws apply equally to all citizens and institutions, including the State.

Stating that Arvind Kejriwal had sought interim bail primarily for campaigning in the Lok Sabha elections, the agency submitted, “It is relevant to note that the right to campaign is neither a fundamental right nor a constitutional right and not even a legal right.”

The agency also argued that 123 elections have taken place in the past five years and if interim bail is granted to Mr Kejriwal for campaigning, then no politician can be kept in judicial custody since polls take place around the year.

Arvind Kejriwal’s Bail Live: Probe Agency ED Opposes Arvind Kejriwal’s Bail

The probe agency ED has filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court opposing Arvind Kejriwal’s petition. It said that laws are equal for all and that campaigning for the Lok Sabha polls is not a fundamental, constitutional, or even a legal right.

The central agency also said that no political leader has ever been granted bail for campaigning and that letting Mr Kejriwal, the national convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), out of jail to canvas for his party candidates would set a wrong precedent.

Arvind Kejriwal Bail Live: Supreme Court Had Reserved Its Verdict On May 7

A Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, had reserved its verdict on interim bail of Arvind Kejriwal on May 7.

The bench reserved its decision after hearing the arguments put forth by senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, who appeared for Mr Kejriwal, and Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who appeared for the Enforcement Directorate.

The bench has divided the hearing on Mr Kejriwal’s petition against his arrest into two parts. His main petition challenges his arrest by the probe agency and seeks it to be declared as “illegal”. The second aspect pertains to the grant of interim bail keeping in mind the ongoing Lok Sabha polls.

Arvind Kejriwal Bail Hearing LIVE: Supreme Court’s Verdict On Arvind Kejriwal’s Bail Likely Today
The Supreme Court is likely to give its order today on interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. Mr Kejriwal was arrested in a money laundering case and is seeking a release from jail to campaign for the ongoing Lok Sabha polls.