“It is the prerogative of the investigating agency to investigate. Certain safeguards have been provided in the law and at this stage, on the basis of the material on record, it cannot be said that the arrest is illegal. However, the agency should not be overzealous,” the court said.
The CBI arrested Kejriwal during the hearing. The court had allowed the agency to question Kejriwal and produce documents for his arrest. The agency had sought five days of custody.
The plea seeking Kejriwal’s arrest was filed by the CBI when he was produced before the court from Tihar jail, where he is in judicial custody in a money laundering case related to the excise policy being probed by the ED.
The CBI counsel had earlier told the court why the CM’s custody was needed. “We need to question him in custody. He put the entire burden on Manish Sisodia and said he has no knowledge about the excise policy. We need to question him with documents. We are not asking him to admit anything,” the counsel said.
Reacting to this, Kejriwal addressed the court and said that the CBI has released fabricated information to the media.
I told Sisodia about the policy objectives: CM
He refuted media reports which claimed that he blamed Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia for the scam.
“CBI sources are spreading information in the media that I have given a statement that Manish Sisodia is guilty. I have not given any such statement. Manish is innocent, you are innocent, I am also innocent. Their whole plan is to defame us in the media. All their allegations are false. Please record this. (CBI sources are spreading information in the media that I have given a statement that Manish Sisodia is guilty. I have not given any such statement. Manish is innocent, you are innocent, I am innocent. Their whole plan is to defame us. All the claims of the media are false. Please record this.) Kejriwal said, “All the claims of the media are false. Please record this.”
He said the CBI wanted a front page headline that Kejriwal has put the entire blame on Manish Sisodia. “They are sensationalising the issue,” he said.
Reacting to this, the judge said that he has read the statement of the Chief Minister and he agrees that he has not said what the CBI has quoted him as saying.
The Delhi CM told the court that he had informed the CBI about the instructions he had given to Sisodia, who was then the deputy CM. “I told him that the excise policy had three objectives. We had to increase revenue and eliminate long queues, besides ensuring equitable distribution,” he said in Hindi. “I had called Manish Sisodia and given him these three instructions.”
He said the CBI had asked him whose idea it was to go ahead with privatisation and he told them it was not his idea.
However, CBI counsel, special public prosecutor (SPP) DP Singh, opposed the arguments. He said, “These are not sources. I argued in the court. No source said anything. And I argued on the basis of facts.” The court responded: “The media takes a line. It is very difficult to control the media in this way.”
Replying to a query posed by the court about the material submitted, the SSP said Vijay Nair was a close aide of Kejriwal and Magunta Reddy had met Kejriwal at his office.
Rejecting the argument of Kejriwal’s counsel senior advocate Vikram Choudhary that the issue of applicability of Section 41A of the CrPC was a matter of concern, the court said the CBI had taken the court’s permission before questioning Kejriwal. Under this section, a police officer has to issue notice to the accused before making an arrest without a warrant.
The court also rejected the CM’s counsel’s argument about the timing and necessity of the arrest. “This court has to consider the merits of the case at this stage. The timing may be cautious but it is not a clear criterion to declare the arrest illegal,” the judge said.
The court noted the SSP’s submission that Kejriwal’s role as one of the “main conspirators” became clear during further investigation, particularly after the statements of Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy (MP) recorded on January 25, 2024, and his son Raghav Magunta recorded on January 20, 2024. The CBI had also claimed that Kejriwal’s answers during interrogation at Tihar were evasive.
To prove that Kejriwal could influence witnesses and derail the investigation, the CBI told the court that certain individuals in the case were not given permission/approval by the Punjab government and several cases were registered against certain individuals in Punjab.
CM’s lawyer Vikram Choudhary said that the agency had all the material when it filed the last three chargesheets. Moreover, the arguments made against Kejriwal are basically the same as those made against Manish Sisodia a year ago. He also questioned the witness statements, saying that these were available in 2023 and not new. He said that these were obtained under pressure.
The SPP also pointed out that the Delhi government had sought feedback from the public on the proposed liquor policy, but the comments were fabricated. Responding to this, advocate Vivek Jain said that over 14,000 comments were received and the agency alleged that seven opinions were fabricated, which is only 0.06% of the opinions.
The court allowed Kejriwal to meet his wife Sunita and lawyers for one hour every day (from 6 to 7 pm) during his custody.
The court also allowed medically prescribed diet, home-cooked food, prescribed medicines, glucometer and spectacles to be provided to the chief minister.
