GUWAHATI: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has claimed in its affidavit filed in the Supreme Court that Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was "directly and indirectly" involved in the formulation of the Delhi liquor policy, which allegedly allowed liquor companies to recover bribes as profits. The ED's affidavit comes in response to Kejriwal's petition challenging his arrest by the ED in the money laundering case linked to the alleged liquor policy scam.
The central agency contends that Kejriwal played an "instrumental" role in formulating the policy, allowing an "exorbitant margin" of 12% for wholesale license holders, up from the previous 5%. The ED claims this decision was made "arbitrarily" and without proper discussion within the Group of Ministers or input from excise officials. The agency further alleges that licenses were granted to anyone willing to pay a fixed fee of Rs 5 crore, deeming this practice both arbitrary and mala fide.
Click here to join our WhatsApp channel
In a detailed explanation of the case against Kejriwal, the ED said, "Proceeds of crime is not restricted to the bribe amount of Rs. 100 crores; it also includes the profit generated by the bribe-giver to the tune of 12%. Rs 100 crores is the bribe amount, and the petitioner made a policy that facilitated the recovery of bribes paid. Rs. 192 crores were recovered by the bribe-giver (Indospirits) in the guise of wholesale profit."
Furthermore, the ED alleges that Rs 45 crores, part of the proceeds of the crime, were utilised by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) for Goa elections, implicating Kejriwal as the national convenor of the party in the offence committed by AAP. Relying on Section 70 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the ED argues that a political party, as an "association of people," can be brought under the PMLA. The agency noted that Kejriwal used his position as Chief Minister to facilitate the offence of money laundering.
ALSO READ: EC Asks BJP, Cong To Respond To MCC Violation Charges Against Modi, Rahul
The ED asserted it had sufficient reasons and materials to arrest Kejriwal under Section 19 of the PMLA, dismissing claims that his arrest was politically motivated to prevent him from campaigning for the upcoming Lok Sabha elections. The agency pointed out that Kejriwal had skipped nine summonses since October 30, 2023. Moreover, the ED stated that Kejriwal did not share his mobile phone password during the search and custody, and alleged that over 170 mobile phones were changed or destroyed by various accused and related persons to erase digital evidence.
Kejriwal approached the Supreme Court challenging the April 9 judgment of the Delhi High Court that rejected his challenge to the ED arrest made on March 21. The Supreme Court, on April 15, issued notice to the ED on Kejriwal's petition, with the matter listed for a hearing in the week commencing April 29.
