TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 535X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rial regarding laundering of the kickbacks on Goa Elections and the money being already spent for the said purpose in the year 2022 itself, the recovery in the year 2024 or non-recovery of any remaining amount will become clear only once prosecution complaint is filed. The Courts in all criminal cases wait for the chargesheet/prosecution complaints to be filed and the entire evidence being placed before it against an accused before giving a finding on a prima-facie case for the purpose of cognizance, charge or final acquittal at the appropriate stages of trial and not when the investigation against an accused has begun and chargesheet/prosecution complaint is yet to be filed. A different criteria cannot be adopted in the present case for the said purpose. The material which has been encapsulated here reveals that Sh. Arvind Kejriwal had allegedly conspired with other persons and was involved in the formulation of Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22, in the process of demanding kickbacks from the South Group, as well as in generation, use and concealment of proceeds of crime. He is allegedly involved in the offence of money laundering in two capacities. Firstly, in his personal capacity as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rty in utilisation of proceeds of crime during Goa Elections 2022, reflecting the reasons to believe that the petitioner was guilty of offence of money laundering in terms of Section 19 of PMLA, and the need to interrogate the petitioner and confront him with the statements of witnesses, and other material as well as digital evidence, coupled with the conduct of petitioner of not joining investigation pursuant to service of nine summons for a period of six months, necessitated the arrest of petitioner Sh. Arvind Kejriwal. Therefore, prima facie, the mandatory provisions of Section 19 of PMLA have been satisfied by the Directorate of Enforcement while arresting the petitioner Sh. Kejriwal, in compliance of judgment of Pankaj Bansal, and there is material at this stage which points out towards the guilt of the petitioner for commission of offence of money laundering. WHETHER THE REMAND ORDER DATED 22.03.2024 HAS BEEN PASSED IN MECHANICAL AND ROUTINE MANNER? - HELD THAT:- This Court observes that the contention regarding remand order having been passed in mechanical and routine manner is without any merit, considering the observations made by the learned Special Court including ensuri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to reach a conclusion that the timing of arrest was deliberate by the Directorate of Enforcement, and that conduct of Sh. Kejriwal was not responsible for a situation in which there was no other option other than to arrest to make him join the investigation. This Court holds that the issue of arrest has to be adjudicated as to whether it was illegal or not within the parameters of law, by application of law and not by political rhetoric. Was there any Necessity to Arrest the Petitioner? - HELD THAT:- The observations of the Hon ble Apex Court in case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary [ 2022 (7) TMI 1316 - SUPREME COURT] were reiterated in case of V. Senthil Balaji [ 2023 (8) TMI 410 - SUPREME COURT] , and Pankaj Bansal and it was observed that it is necessary for the officer concerned to record reasons for his belief that a person is guilty of an offence under PMLA and needs to be arrested. The conduct of the petitioner Sh. Kejriwal of not joining investigation left little option with the Directorate of Enforcement other than his arrest for the purpose of investigation of a pending case, in which other co-accused are in judicial custody, and the investigating agency is also running again ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Mr. Arkaj Kumar, Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Mr. Hitarth Raja, Ms. Abhipriya Rai, Mr. Kartik Sabharwal, Mr. Vivek Gaurav, Mr. Agrimaa Singh, Mr. Kanishk Maurya and Mr. Ritumbhara Garg, Advocates for ED along with Ms. Bhanupriya Meena, DD, Mr. Gaurav Saini, ALA and Mr. S.K. Sharma, IO for ED. JUDGMENT SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J. EXORDIUM 1. On 21.03.2024, a search was conducted by the Directorate of Enforcement at the official residence of Sh. Arvind Kejriwal, petitioner herein, who is the Chief Minister of the State of Delhi. After the search, he was served with grounds of arrest and was arrested on the same day at 09:05 PM by the Directorate of Enforcement in connection with ECIR No. HIU-II/14/2022 regarding his involvement in the offence of money laundering with regard to Delhi Excise Policy 2021-2022. After arrest, petitioner was produced before the learned Special Judge (PC Act) CBI-09 (MP/MLA Cases), Rouse Avenue Courts, Delhi ( learned Special Court ), where the Directorate of Enforcement had sought his custody for the purpose of interrogation which was granted vide order dated 22.03.2024. 2. During the hearing of the present case, this Court was informed that after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in framing and implementation of excise policy of GNCTD for the year 2021-2022. The CBI had filed a chargesheet dated 25.11.2022, cognizance of which was taken by the learned Special Court on 15.12.2022. Thereafter, on 25.04.2023 and 08.07.2023, two supplementary chargesheets had also been filed before the learned Special Court respectively, against a total of 16 accused persons. It is the case of CBI that while the excise policy of GNCTD was at the stage of formulation or drafting, the accused persons had hatched a criminal conspiracy, in furtherance of which some loopholes had intentionally been left or created in the policy, which were meant to be utilised or exploited later on. Further, huge amount of money was paid as kickbacks in advance to the public servants involved in commission of the alleged offences and in exchange of undue pecuniary benefits to the conspirators involved in the liquor trade. As alleged, kickbacks of around Rs. 20-30 crores in advance were paid to accused Sh. Vijay Nair, Sh. Manish Sisodia and some other persons belonging to the ruling political party in Delhi, and the other public servants involved in conspiracy by some persons in the liquor business ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ects the level playing field in the upcoming Lok Sabha Elections 2024. Sh. Singhvi further contends that level playing field is just not a phrase of words but rather it has three vital components. Firstly, it is part of free and fair elections , secondly elections are part of democracy and thirdly democracy in turn is a part of basic structure of the Constitution of India. Thus, the timing of the arrest of the petitioner directly hampers the level playing field of free and fair elections to be conducted throughout the nation as the petitioner is a member of the leading opposition party i.e., the Aam Aadmi Party and his arrest directly violates his right to campaign in the upcoming Lok Sabha Elections. Further, the timing of the arrest ensures that Sh. Kejriwal is unable to participate in democratic activities and the effort is to try and disintegrate his Party before even the first vote is cast. Sh. Singhvi argues that the same is pretty evident from the fact that the first summons issued against Sh. Kejriwal by the Directorate of Enforcement was in October, 2023 and he was arrested on 21.03.2024 which reeks of mala fide and it directly damages the basic structure and the level pla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... many times, is no answer to saying that the Directorate of Enforcement has material to arrest Sh. Kejriwal. Further reliance has been placed on Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1244 , wherein the test of arrest has been kept at a higher pedestal as the investigating agency has to satisfy the threshold of necessity to arrest under Section 19 of PMLA, which has not been met in the present case. Apart from the fact that the necessity to arrest is occasioned by ulterior motives, the only object is to humiliate, insult Sh. Kejriwal and to disable him from campaigning in the present case, as argued by Sh. Singhvi. Moreover, it is submitted that the replies given to the summons of the Directorate of Enforcement were very detailed. It is further argued that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, Sh. Kejriwal cannot be said to be a flight risk and there can be no material that can be tampered with by Sh. Kejriwal after one and half years, after the case was actually registered. 12. Sh. Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner further argues that the application of remand of the Directorate of Enforcement itself says that they need to find, one and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statements implicating Sh. Kejriwal. It is further argued that another astonishing fact which has been recently revealed is that Sh. Sarath Reddy has donated to the Ruling Party at Center via Electoral Bonds which is also an alarming concern. Further, Sh. Sarath Reddy was coerced to give a statement contrary to his earlier statements and thus by doing so, he had secured no objection of the Directorate of Enforcement for his grant of bail on medical reasons, which was just a back pain, on 08.05.2022. It is this argued that the barter of liberty for statement under Section 50 of PMLA is writ large on the very face of it and is a very alarming concern. Similarly, statement of co-accused Buchi Babu is completely hearsay without any material or evidence. Moreover, hearsay evidence cannot be relevant evidence as per Kalyan Kumar Gogoi v. Ashutosh Agnihotri (2011) 2 SCC 532 . It is argued that as regards the statement of one Sh. C. Arvind, he in no manner has alleged anything against the petitioner with respect to his role in proceeds of crime. It is also vehemently argued that the Directorate of Enforcement has used a selective approach in relying upon statements i.e., the statements wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectorate of Enforcement s investigation and goes beyond the remit of them investigating it. 16. Sh. Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel further argues that Petitioner cannot be held vicariously liable for a specific offence under Section 3 of PMLA by virtue of Section 70 of PMLA, which only relates to companies. It is further argued that Aam Aadmi Party which is a political party under Section 2(f) of Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 cannot be held to be a company as the Directorate of Enforcement alleges on grounds of arrest. Further, there is no specific role or act under Section 3 of PMLA establishing that the petitioner is liable vicariously. 17. Thus, it is argued that the present writ petition deserves to be allowed. Therefore, the arrest of the petitioner be declared illegal, arbitrary, non-est and the consequent remand order dated 22.03.2024 be set aside and the petitioner be released. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT 18. Sh. S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General ( ASG ) appearing on behalf of the Directorate of Enforcement has raised certain preliminary objections in relation to the writ petition in question. It is submitted that the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Raju further contends the fact that the offence of money laundering has taken place is beyond any doubt as the learned Special Court has taken cognizance in all five prosecution complaints and in those cognizance orders there are categorical findings that an offence of money laundering has prima-facie been committed. 21. Sh. S.V. Raju, learned ASG further argues that all the procedural requirements of Section 19(1) and 19(2) of PMLA as well as Article 22(1) and (2) of the Constitution of India have been complied with by the Directorate of Enforcement. It is argued that the petitioner was arrested on 21.03.2024 at 09:05 PM, and the grounds for his arrest were informed and furnished to him in writing. Moreover, the written grounds of arrest running into 28 pages were served upon the petitioner at 9:05 PM, and the receipt of the same was duly acknowledged by the petitioner in writing. It is further stated that the intimation of arrest was also given to the wife of the petitioner and his lawyers. It is submitted that the arrest of the present petitioner was made following all procedures prescribed under the law in the presence of two independent witnesses who have signed the arrest mem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the petitioner was actively involved in the use of proceeds of crime which was generated through the formulation of the Excise Policy, in the Goa Election campaign of the Aam Aadmi Party of which the present petitioner is the Convenor and the ultimate decision maker. 23. Sh. S.V. Raju, also argues that as per investigation conducted so far, the proceeds of crime of about approximately Rs. 45 Crores which were part of the amount received from the South Group were used in the election campaign of Aam Aadmi Party in Goa in the year 2021-22. This is supported by statements of various persons engaged in the election campaign activities of Aam Aadmi Party in Goa, and have revealed that cash payments were made to them for their work done as Survey workers, Area managers, Assembly managers etc. These persons have also revealed that these payments were made to them in cash, and were managed by one Sh. Chanpreet. These persons and activities related to the election campaign were overall managed by Sh. Vijay Nair and Sh. Durgesh Pathak, Aam Aadmi Party, MLA in Delhi. This shows the utilisation of proceeds of crime. This is also corroborated by one of the Candidates of Aam Aadmi Party in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sociation or body of individual citizens of India can make an application for registration as a political party and since APP is an association of such individuals it got itself registered under the RP Act. It is stated that the petitioner is liable to be prosecuted under Section 70 PMLA also as he is the National Convenor of Aam Aadmi Party and a member of Political Affairs Committee National Executive, so the petitioner is ultimately responsible for the funds being used in the election expenses including their generation. As the petitioner not only was the brain behind Aam Aadmi Party but also controls its major activities, he is also involved in demands of kickbacks which have inter-alia generated proceeds of crime. He further argues that the Directorate of Enforcement has recorded statements under Section 50 PMLA of members of the Aam Aadmi Party who very categorically stated that the petitioner herein is the National Convenor and is overall incharge of the party. 27. Sh. S.V. Raju lastly submits that the investigation qua the petitioner herein is at a very nascent stage and that there are certain statements recorded under Section 50 of PMLA which have not been mentioned in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on-bailable. *** Explanation . For the removal of doubts, it is clarified that the expression Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable shall mean and shall be deemed to have always meant that all offences under this Act shall be cognizable offences and non-bailable offences notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), and accordingly the officers authorised under this Act are empowered to arrest an accused without warrant, subject to the fulfilment of conditions under section 19 and subject to the conditions enshrined under this section. (Emphasis supplied) iii. Judicial Precedents Qua Exercise of Power Under Section 19 of PMLA 33. The Hon ble Apex Court, while dealing with constitutional validity of certain provisions of PMLA and the procedure followed by Directorate of Enforcement, in case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929, had made the following observations: 322. Section 19 of the 2002 Act postulates the manner in which arrest of person involved in money-laundering can be effected. Sub-section (1) of Section 19 envisages that the Director, Deputy Director, Assistant Director, or any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manner in which the arrest of a person involved in money laundering can be effected. It was observed that such power was vested in high-ranking officials and that apart, Section 19 of the Act of 2002 provided inbuilt safeguards to be adhered to by the authorized officers, such as, of recording reasons for the belief regarding involvement of the person in the offence of money laundering and, further, such reasons have to be recorded in writing and while effecting arrest, the grounds of arrest are to be informed to that person JURISPRUDENCE OF REMAND UNDER CRIMINAL LAW 36. Since the present petition also seeks setting aside of remand order dated 22.03.2024 on the ground that the same was passed by the learned Special Court in a patently mechanical and routine manner, it will be relevant to take note of the legislative framework and judicial precedents on the issues as to what is remand of an accused, the power of Courts to remand an accused to the custody of police, and the essentials to be considered for grant of remand in cases under PMLA. Power of Remand under Section 167 of Cr.P.C. 37. Relevant portion of Section 167 of Cr.P.C. reads as under: 167. Procedure when investigation ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dy on production of the accused either in person or through the medium of electronic video linkage; (c) no Magistrate of the second class, not specially empowered in this behalf by the High Court, shall authorise detention in the custody of the police. Explanation I. For the avoidance of doubts, it is hereby declared that, notwithstanding the expiry of the period specified in paragraph (a), the accused shall be detained in custody so long as he does not furnish bail. Explanation II. If any question arises whether an accused person was produced before the Magistrate as required under clause (b), the production of the accused person may be proved by his signature on the order authorising detention or by the order certified by the Magistrate as to production of the accused person through the medium of electronic video linkage, as the case may be 38. Thus, Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. authorises the detention of an arrestee beyond 24 hours and empowers the Magistrate to remand an accused to police custody, though not exceeding the period of 15 days. 39. In case of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51, the Hon'ble Apex Court had discussed the object and importance of Section 16 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... true that the police custody although is not the be-all and end-all of the whole investigation, yet it is one of its primary requisites particularly in the investigation of serious and heinous crimes. The legislature also noticed this and, has therefore, permitted limited police custody. 41. In V. Senthil Balaji (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court emphasised that the power under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. is to be exercised after applying judicial mind and passing a reasoned order. The observations in this regard read as under: 53. ...While authorizing the detention of an accused, the Magistrate has got a very wide discretion. Such an act is a judicial function and, therefore, a reasoned order indicating application of mind is certainly warranted. He may or may not authorize the detention while exercising his judicial discretion. Investigation is a process which might require an accused s custody from time to time as authorised by the competent Court. Generally, no other Court is expected to act as a supervisory authority in that process. An act of authorisation pre-supposes the need for custody. Such a need for a police custody has to be by an order of a Magistrate rendering his au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C., 1973 does provide adequate safeguards to an arrested person. If Section 167 of the CrPC, 1973 is not applicable, then there is no role for the Magistrate either to remand or otherwise. 68. Such a Magistrate has a distinct role to play when a remand is made of an accused person to an authority under the PMLA, 2002. It is his bounden duty to see to it that Section 19 of the PMLA, 2002 is duly complied with and any failure would entitle the arrestee to get released. The Magistrate shall also peruse the order passed by the authority under Section 19(1) of the PMLA, 2002. Section 167 of the CrPC, 1973 is also meant to give effect to Section 19 of the PMLA, 2002 and therefore it is for the Magistrate to satisfy himself of its due compliance. Upon such satisfaction, he can consider the request for custody in favour of an authority, as Section 62 of the PMLA, 2002, does not speak about the authority which is to take action for non-compliance of the mandate of Section 19 of the PMLA, 2002. A remand being made by the Magistrate upon a person being produced before him, being an independent entity, it is well open to him to invoke the said provision in a given case. To put it otherwise, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e person arrested by the ED under Section 19(1) of the Act of 2002 has a duty to verify and ensure that the conditions in Section 19 are duly satisfied and that the arrest is valid and lawful. In the event the Court fails to discharge this duty in right earnest and with the proper perspective, as pointed out hereinbefore, the order of remand would have to fail on that ground and the same cannot, by any stretch of imagination, validate an unlawful arrest made under Section 19 of the Act of 2002. 18. In the matter of Madhu Limaye was a 3-Judge Bench decision of this Court wherein it was observed that it would be necessary for the State to establish that, at the stage of remand, the Magistrate directed detention in jail custody after applying his mind to all relevant matters and if the arrest suffered on the ground of violation of Article 22(1) of the Constitution, the order of remand would not cure the constitutional infirmities attaching to such arrest. ANALYSIS FINDINGS I. MATERIAL AGAINST THE PETITIONER COLLECTED BY THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT 45. One of the main grounds on which the petitioner Sh. Kejriwal has sought the declaration of his arrest as illegal and arbitrary is th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sh. Manish Sisodia. WhatsApp messages retrieved from Sh. Buchi Babu s phone revealed certain Excise Policy provisions, two days before its finalisation by the GoM and Council of Ministers. Sh. Buchi Babu claimed that Sh. Vijay Nair had sent these provisions in relation to the new excise policy yet to be introduced to him and to Sh. Arun Pillai. The Role of Petitioner in Demanding Kickbacks Petitioner s Meetings with the South Liquor Lobby 48. It is also the case of Directorate of Enforcement that the petitioner had demanded kickbacks from the South Group in exchange of awarding favours to them in the formulation and implementation of the Excise Policy 2021-22. A. In support of this claim, reliance has been placed on the statement of Sh. Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy, recorded on 16.07.2023 under Section 50 of PMLA and on 17.07.2023 under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. wherein he had revealed that during March 2021, he had sought a meeting with the petitioner Sh. Kejriwal regarding liquor business in Delhi, and the office of the petitioner had communicated to Sh. Magunta S. Reddy that he could meet him on 16.03.2021 at 04:30 PM. During the meeting, Sh. Kejriwal had informed him that Ms. K. Kavi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... maran, and these funds were borrowed from uncle of Sh. Raghav Magunta i.e, Sh. Sudhakar Reddy. C. Sh. Gopi Kumaran had corroborated the statement given by Sh. Raghav Magunta on 08.08.2023. D. In the statement dated 25.04.2023 recorded under Section 50 of PMLA, Sh. Sarath Reddy had revealed that he had expressed his desire to Sh. Arun Pillai that he wished to meet the top officials of Delhi Government including Sh. Arvind Kejriwal and Sh. Manish Sisodia, and Sh. Arun Pillai had assured him that he would arrange the meeting through Sh. Vijay Nair. He had further revealed that in July-August 2021, upon arriving in Delhi, he was picked up in a black SUV near the Oberoi Hotel and was taken to a government bungalow, which Sh. Vijay Nair claimed, was close to the residence of the present petitioner. Upon reaching there, Sh. Sarath Reddy had a 10-minute meeting with Sh. Kejriwal i.e. the petitioner herein, during which Sh. Kejriwal had assured him of Sh. Vijay Nair s capabilities in handling any issues related to their business, which means liquor business. The discussion also touched upon the new liquor policy, which Sh. Kejriwal mentioned would be beneficial for all parties involved. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s via hawala transactions, along with Sh. Abhishek Boinpally, Sh. Rajesh Joshi, and Sh. Sudhir. Sh. Abhishek Boinpally represents the South Group, Sh. Dinesh Arora is close to Sh. Manish Sisodia, Sh. Sudhir is linked to Vijay Nair, and Sh. Rajesh Joshi owns M/s Chariot Productions Media Pvt Ltd, which handled Aam Aadmi Party s Goa election campaign. 54. Upon scrutinising the vendors of M/s Chariot Productions involved in outdoor campaigning of Aam Aadmi Party, it was discovered that several vendors had received payments partly in cash and partly through bills . For instance, M/s. Grace Advertising, whose employee was Sh. Islam Qazi had disclosed in statements dated 12.12.2022 and 23.12.2022 that he had made an invoice for only a partial amount as the remainder was paid to him in cash. Further, he had facilitated the engagement of another vendor, M/s. Sparks Entertainment, with M/s. Chariot Productions, thereby informing one Sh. Aaron Schubert D souza that payments by the Aam Aadmi Party would be made both in cash and through bills. Furthermore, Sh. Islam Qazi admitted to receiving Rs 6.29 lakhs via hawala operators in Mumbai. Subsequent investigations revealed that Sh. Anand Vyas a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of his relationship with the Aam Aadmi Party. 57. On examining the money trail, the Directorate of Enforcement has discovered that the statements of Sh. Ashok Patel, Sh. Kiran Bhai Patel, and Sh. Jagdish Sharma revealed that funds transferred to Goa originated from four routes: approximately Rs. 12 crore from Sh. Ashok Chandu Bhai of M/s Asheel Corporation (Angadiya), Rs. 7.1 crore from Sh. Devang Solanki of M/s KS Enterprise (Angadiya), Rs. 16 crore from Kirti Amba Lal (Angadiya), and Rs. 7.5 crore from M/s Neelkanth (Angadiya), with an additional Rs. 2 crore from M/s Ma Ambey (Angadiya), which is corroborated by the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 50 of PMLA. 58. Further, Sh. Ashok Chandu Bhai of M/s Asheel Corporation had allegedly received approximately Rs. 12 crore from Sh. Rajesh Joshi, owner of M/s. Chariot Productions and Sh. Damodar Prasad Sharma, an employee of Chariot. 59. One Sh. Devang Solanki had disclosed about receiving Rs. 7.1 crore from Sh. Arvind Singh, who was associated with M/s India Ahead News Channel, owned by Sh. Gautam Mootha and co-owned by Sh. Abhishek Boinpally of the South Group. Further, analysis of CDR has confirmed communication bet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 70 of PMLA, which reads as under: 70. Offences by companies. (1) Where a person committing a contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of any rule, direction or order made thereunder is a company, every person who, at the time the contravention was committed, was in charge of and was responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the contravention and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly: Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render any such person liable to punishment if he proves that the contravention took place without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent such contravention. *** Explanation 1. For the purposes of this section, (i) company means any body corporate and includes a firm or other association of individuals; and (ii) director , in relation to a firm, means a partner in the firm. Explanation 2. For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that a company may be prosecuted, notwithstanding whether the prosecution or conviction of any legal juridical person shall be contingent on the prosecution ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction of the National Executive or the Political Affairs Committee is taken for deciding election expenses, and that prabhari or state Incharge makes these expenses . He has further revealed that the National Convenor is the one who decides as to who shall head the state elections for their party. 68. Thus, on the basis of this material, it is the case of Directorate of Enforcement that Sh. Kejriwal has been intrinsically involved in the entire conspiracy of the Delhi Excise Policy Scam wherein the proceeds of crime were used in the election campaign of Aam Aadmi Party for Goa Assembly elections, and all these activities were not only done with his knowledge but also with his active collusion. 69. Therefore, suffice it to say that it is a matter of arguments and trial which may be taken up at the time of framing of charge, or any other appropriate stage. This Court notes that there is sufficient material on record with regard to Sh. Kejriwal being the National Convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party, and in view of the statement of Sh. N.D. Gupta recorded on 16.11.2023, and other sufficient material on record in light of statements of the Hawala operators and the statement of one of the Aa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cash amounts were received and sent for Goa Elections. The names and details of some survey workers, area managers, assembly managers and Aam Aadmi Party candidate are not being mentioned in this order since investigation is still pending, evidence is still being collected and mentioning of the statements in detail may be detrimental to the interest of the petitioner Sh. Kejriwal and the investigating agency at a later stage. 74. Thus, this Court having gone through the documents and the statements handed over to it by Directorate of Enforcement for the purpose of passing of this order to reach a conclusion as to whether Directorate of Enforcement had sufficient material in its possession for the arrest and remand of Sh. Kejriwal including the evidence regarding the money trail, and also having gone through the material as mentioned in the preceding paragraph reaches a conclusion that once the proceeds of crime which were allegedly received in the form of kickbacks through the South Group were spent on Goa Elections, which is corroborated by the statements of the approver who has allegedly given kickbacks for Goa Elections and the statements of Hawala operators and the candidate of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... One of the reasons given by Sh Manish Sisodia is to compensate the wholesaler for increased license fee from Rs 5 lacs to Rs. 5 Cr. During this policy period, 14 LI licences were given by Excise Department, by raising the license fee for LI to Rs. 5 Cr in the entire period of operation of the Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22, the Govt. has earned Rs. 75.16 Cr from the license fee of LI (as per Excise department communication dated 11.04.2023) (RUD 34). On the other hand the excess profit earned by the wholesalers during this period is to the tune of Rs. 338 Cr. (7% additional profit earned due to increase from 5% to 12%, Rs. 581 Cr being the total profit of LI as informed by Excise department). Therefore there 1s no logical correlation between the license fee increase and the profit margin increase. Whereas this excess profit margin benefit could have been passed on to the consumers in form of lower MRP. Contrary to the claim that the policy was meant to benefit the public or the exchequer, it was rather a conspiracy to ensure massive illegal gains to a select few private players/individuals/entities. 22. The charge-sheet under the PoC Act includes offences for unlawful gains to a priva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the members of the liquor group had meetings on different dates, including 16.03.2021, and had prepared the new excise policy, which was handed over to Vijay Nair. Thereupon, the commission/fee, which was earlier fixed at minimum of 5%, was enhanced to fixed fee of 12% payable to wholesale distributor. The appellant Manish Sisodia was aware that three liquor manufacturers have 85% share in the liquor market in Delhi. Out of them two manufacturers had 65% liquor share, while 14 small manufacturers had 20% market share. As per the term in the new excise policy - each manufacturer could appoint only one wholesale distributor, through whom alone the liquor would be sold. At the same time, the wholesale distributors could enter into distribution agreements with multiple manufacturers. This facilitated getting kickbacks or bribes from the wholesale distributors having substantial market share and turnover. The licence fee payable by the wholesale distributor was a fixed amount of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- (rupees five crores only). It was not dependant on the turnover. The new policy facilitated big wholesale distributors, whose outpour towards the licence fee was fixed. The policy favoured ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he chargesheet/prosecution complaints to be filed and the entire evidence being placed before it against an accused before giving a finding on a prima-facie case for the purpose of cognizance, charge or final acquittal at the appropriate stages of trial and not when the investigation against an accused has begun and chargesheet/prosecution complaint is yet to be filed. A different criteria cannot be adopted in the present case for the said purpose. 78. To summarise, the material which has been encapsulated hereinabove reveals that Sh. Arvind Kejriwal had allegedly conspired with other persons and was involved in the formulation of Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22, in the process of demanding kickbacks from the South Group, as well as in generation, use and concealment of proceeds of crime. He is allegedly involved in the offence of money laundering in two capacities. Firstly, in his personal capacity as he was involved in formulation of the Excise Policy and in demanding kickbacks. Secondly, in his capacity as the National Convenor of Aam Aadmi Party as per Section 70(1) of PMLA, for use of proceeds of crime of Rs. 45 crores in the election campaign of Aam Aadmi Party in Goa Elections 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ree Judge Bench has categorically observed that the statements of witnesses/ accused are admissible in evidence in view of Section 50 of the said Act and such statements may make out a formidable case about the involvement of the accused in the commission of a serious offence of money laundering ... 83. At the present stage of deciding the writ petition challenging arrest on the parameters of Section 19 of PMLA, when the investigation qua the petitioner is not even complete and prosecution complaint has not been filed, this Court would take into consideration the material collected by the investigating agency including statements of witnesses recorded under Section 50 of PMLA, and keep into consideration that it has been held by the Hon ble Apex Court that statements under Section 50 of PMLA can make out a strong prima-facie case of money laundering against an accused. Can the Statement of an Approver be Brushed Aside at the Stage of Arrest and Remand of an Accused? 84. Sh. Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, during the course of arguments, had questioned the credibility of the statements of approvers in the present case. It was one his arguments that in their state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment is recorded under Section 50 of PMLA may or may not be an accused. An approver is always an accused who is granted pardon by the concerned Trial Judge, who appears as a witness for the prosecution during trial. 3. The proceedings under Section 50 of PMLA are solely by the prosecuting agency without any interference of a Court of law. The proceedings of recording statement of approver and granting of pardon are judicial proceedings with no interference of the investigating agency. 88. This Court therefore holds that, the contents of above paragraph would lead to a conclusion that to doubt and cast aspersions regarding the manner of granting of pardon or recording statement of approver amounts to casting aspersions on the judicial process, since granting of pardon or recording of statement of approver is not the domain of investigating agency. It is a judicial process wherein a judicial officer follows the provisions of Section 164 of Cr.P.C. for recording the statement of an approver and also for granting or not granting pardon to such approver. It will be useful to mention that before recording the confession of an approver, the concerned Judge satisfies himself regarding the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is writing it. The law on approver as well as the law on its evidentiary value has been tested by the Privy Council and the Hon ble Supreme Court in innumerable cases, and has not been struck down to be unconstitutional till date by any Court of law. The present case is neither the first nor the last case wherein the approver s statements have been recorded or have been relied upon by the prosecution. 92. Trials have taken place, are taking place and have ended in conviction or acquittal in which approver s statements have been recorded and relied upon by prosecution. 93. Further, the question of non-supply and reliance of some earlier statements of the approvers cannot arise at this stage as the documents are not to be supplied at the stage of remand or arrest but at the appropriate stage of trial under Section 207 Cr.P.C., when as a matter of right, the accused will be entitled to all the documents and statements as per law, whether relied or unrelied. Thus, the argument that the Directorate of Enforcement has selectively relied upon the later statements of the approvers and not the earlier ones wherein the petitioner was not named cannot be appreciated at this stage as it is a m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that he had paid an amount of Rs. 60 crores approximately to the ruling party at Centre through electoral bonds. 97. In this Court s opinion, who gives tickets for contesting elections to whom or who purchases electoral bonds for what purpose is not the concern of this Court, as this Court is required to apply the law and the evidence before it as it is and in the context in which it has been placed before it. 98. This Court also wonders as to whether it can, while deciding the present petition seeking declaration of arrest of petitioner as illegal, put fetters on a witness, who is not an accused, to contest elections and question his credibility without there being any material to suggest that his statement is prima facie unreliable or untrustworthy, especially when to the contrary, the Directorate of Enforcement has collected material which corroborates the presence of the said witness Sh. Magunta S. Reddy at the office of the petitioner herein on the date and time as mentioned by the witness in his statement. 99. Whether Sh. Magunta S. Reddy or Sh. Sarath Reddy gave statements out of their own free will and the reason for coming out with some facts in their statements against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on its merits but later apologises to the complainant after realising his mistake or acknowledging his wrongdoing. These instances demonstrate that individuals may evolve in their understanding of their actions and the legal consequences thereof, and these developments even otherwise are covered within the framework of the judicial process and the law of the country. III. WHETHER THE ARREST OF THE PETITIONER IS IN VIOLATION OF DIRECTIONS OF HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF PANKAJ BANSAL VS. UNION OF INDIA? 104. The prayer in the present petition itself mentions that the challenge to the arrest of the petitioner is on the anvil of judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Pankaj Bansal (supra). In case of Pankaj Bansal (supra), the Hon ble Supreme Court has inter alia held that the grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing to the person being so arrested through exercise of powers under Section 19 of PMLA, and failure to do so would render the arrest illegal. 105. Insofar as the compliance with the aforesaid directions and the mandate of Section 19 of PMLA is concerned, this Court notes that it is an admitted case of the petitioner that he was supplied grounds of arrest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... one candidate of Aam Aadmi Party and some survey workers, area managers, assembly managers, who had worked with the Aam Aadmi Party during the Goa Election 2022, alongwith WhatsApp chats between several persons, and other material collected through raids of Income Tax, which reflect that the kickbacks which were received from South Group were utilised by Aam Aadmi Party for funding Goa Elections 2022, whose National Convenor is the present petitioner. Contention regarding there being no fresh material collected by the respondent since October, 2023 109. One of the grounds mentioned in the petition states that from October 2023 till the arrest of petitioner in March 2024, the investigating agency has not collected any new material whatsoever and the material which was relied upon to summon the petitioner for the first time in October 2023 is now being relied upon to arrest him also. 110. Having gone through the records of the case including the case file handed over by the investigating officer, this Court is of the opinion that this argument of the petitioner is misconceived as the Directorate of Enforcement, after October 2023, has carried out further investigation and has recorde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in a patently routine and mechanical manner by the learned Special Court. 116. In the initial discussion in this judgment, this Court has already referred to the law governing remand of an accused, ordinarily, and also in cases under PMLA. In case of V. Senthil Balaji (supra), the Hon ble Supreme Court has emphasised that the Court has a wide discretion for remanding an accused to the custody of investigating agency, and such discretion must be exercised by passing a reasoned order, including ensuring compliance of Section 19 of PMLA in cases where arrest has been made under the provisions of PMLA. Further, the Hon ble Supreme Court had observed in case of Pankaj Bansal (supra) that the remand orders which had been challenged therein reflected total failure on part of the learned Trial Court in discharging its duty since the remand order did not even record the finding that the Court had perused the grounds of arrest and that there was proper compliance of Section 19 of PMLA, and the Trial Court therein had merely noted that the custodial interrogation of the accused was required in view of the seriousness of allegations and the stage of investigation. 117. In light of the settled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded U/S 164 Cr.P.C. are also on record. Further, as revealed by co-accused Vijay Nair during investigation, he lived in a government bungalow, officially alloted to a Cabinet Minister close to the bungalow of the accused and is alleged to have received kickbacks to the tune of Rs. 100 crores from the South group on behalf of the accused, in exchange for grant of favours in group of M/s. Indo Spirits, even retail zones and L-1 licences. 32. Further, there are allegations of proceeds of crime of approximately Rs. 45 crores having been allegedly received as part of the bribe from the South group and used in the election campaign of AAP in Goa assembly elections 2021-22. The examination of vendors engaged for out door campaign revealed that they were made payment partly in cash as revealed through various chats between the vendors. 33. ED has further claimed that the examination of money trail reveals that the money which was transferred to Goa came from four routes through different Angadiyas and the statements of various persons engaged in the elections campaign activities by AAP in Goa are stated to have also revealed that cash payment were made to them for work done as survey worke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 22.03.2024, while allowing the request of Directorate of Enforcement and granting it six days remand of the petitioner, had observed as under: 38. Therefore, in view of the above facts and circumstances, the above named accused is hereby remanded to the custody of ED till 28.03.2024 for the purposes of his detailed and sustained interrogation with respect to his role and to unearth the remaining proceeds of crime and for confronting him with data retrieved from digital devices and material seized during investigation... 121. In case of CBI v. Vikas Mishra (2023) 6 SCC 49, the Hon ble Supreme Court has observed that the right of custodial interrogation / investigation is a very important right in favour of the investigating agency to unearth the truth. 122. This Court has already noted in the preceding discussion that it has gone through the entire case file produced before this Court by the Investigating officer. In the present case, the Directorate of Enforcement had sought to exercise its right to interrogate the petitioner in its custody since he had to be confronted with the large number of statements recorded by the investigating agency as well as other material collected du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Section 19 of PMLA, taking note of material available against the petitioner and the need for his custodial interrogation. 126. Though not argued before this Court on behalf of the petitioner, this Court still deems it crucial to note that though the present petition was filed challenging the first remand order dated 22.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Court, however, the remand of petitioner Sh. Kejriwal had thereafter been extended vide order dated 28.03.2024 wherein the petitioner himself had submitted before the learned Special Court that he was ready and willing to cooperate with the investigating agency and he had no objection if the custody remand was extended further. 127. Moreover, at this point of time, the petitioner is not in the custody remand of Directorate of Enforcement, rather is in judicial custody by virtue of order dated 01.04.2024 which has neither been challenged till date, nor any application has been filed seeking bail in the present case. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner had not raised any objection to the judicial remand of the petitioner when he was remanded to judicial custody on 01.04.2024 by the learned Special Court. V. TIMING OF ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns in five states in the month of November 2023, and the petitioner is the star campaigner of the AAP, and has official commitments. 2. 18.12.2023 (Second Summons) 21.12.2023 Reply given by petitioner on 20.12.2023 The petitioner has to attend Vipassana Meditation course. The timing of summons strengthens petitioner s belief that it is based on a propoganda. The petitioner further re-iterated that it is not clear that in which capacity the petitioner is being called, and that the summons appears to be motivated. 3. 22.12.2023 (Third Summons) 03.01.2024 Reply given by petitioner on 03.01.2024 The petitioner stated that he is held up in the Rajya Sabha Elections. It was also stated that filing of nominations will start from 03.01.2024, and voting will take place on 19.01.2024. The petitioner further re-iterated that it is not clear that in which capacity the petitioner is being called, and that the summons appears to be motivated. It was also stated that the Directorate of Enforcement has not been replying to the contentions raised in the replies given by the petitioner. 4. 12.01.2024 (Fourth Summons) 18.01.2024/19.01.2024 Reply given by petitioner on 18.01.2024 The petitioner will b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning, preparing, and campaigning for the General Elections of 2024. 132. This Court, therefore, notes that Sh. Kejriwal had sent a reply to every summon and the content of each reply can be summarised for easy understanding that: i. he was not informed as to why and in what capacity he was being summoned; ii. he was being summoned at the behest of ruling party at the centre i.e. BJP, to silence the voice of opposition; iii. he was busy with his schedule, being the Chief Minister of Delhi; iv. he could be questioned through video-conferencing or by sending a questionnaire. 133. In this regard, this Court is of the opinion that the Directorate of Enforcement is not required under the PMLA to inform the person to whom summons are being sent under Section 50 of PMLA as to in which capacity, the person is being called. 134. Further, this Court is of the opinion that there is no denying the fact that Sh. Kejriwal, being the sitting Chief Minister of the State of Delhi will have a busy schedule and many events and meetings to attend to. However, being the Chief Minister of the State, he was aware that an investigating agency was sending him summons under the provisions of Section 50 of PM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 193 and 228 of the IPC. Even so, the fact remains that Article 20(3) or for that matter Section 25 of the Evidence Act, would come into play only when the person so summoned is an accused of any offence at the relevant time and is being compelled to be a witness against himself. This position is well-established 137. The Hon ble Apex Court in case of Directorate of Enforcement v. State of Tamil Nadu, SLP (Crl.) No. 1959-1963/2024, also explained the power to summon a person under Section 50 of PMLA and consequent duty of the person so summoned to respect and respond to the same. These observations are extracted hereunder: 5. Sub-section (3) of Section 50 thereof being relevant, reads as under:- (3) All the persons so summoned shall be bound to attend in person or through authorised agents, as such officer may direct, and shall be bound to state the truth upon any subject respecting which they are examined or make statements, and produce such documents as may be required. 6. From the bare reading of the said provisions, it clearly transpires that the concerned officers as mentioned therein, have the power to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary, either to give e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ters, and thus, no fault can be found with his conduct which necessitated his arrest by the Directorate of Enforcement. 140. The argument as to whether the conduct of Sh. Kejriwal of not joining investigation, despite service of nine summons, was a justifiable contributive cause necessitating his arrest, when tested in light of the judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court mentioned above will lead to a conclusion that any person to whom a summon is sent by a competent authority under PMLA is bound to appear before the said authority in person. In this Court s opinion, the argument that there was no non-compliance on behalf of Sh. Kejriwal since he had replied to all nine summons has to be rejected since replying to summons is not equivalent to joining investigation under Section 50 of PMLA as there is no procedure prescribed that replying to a summon will suffice joining an investigation or any other proceeding as contemplated under Section 50 of PMLA. Further, replying to summons in this case cannot be equated with joining of investigation as the replies sent by Sh. Kejriwal were counter questioning the investigating agency about its intent and authority to summon him to join invest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the investigating agency or to do investigation in a particular manner including for court-monitored investigation. (Emphasis supplied) 144. In P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement (2019) 9 SCC 24 also, the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that: 66 there is a well-defined and demarcated function in the field of investigation and its subsequent adjudication. It is not the function of the court to monitor the investigation process so long as the investigation does not violate any provision of law. It must be left to the discretion of the investigating agency to decide the course of investigation. If the court is to interfere in each and every stage of the investigation and the interrogation of the accused, it would affect the normal course of investigation. It must be left to the investigating agency to proceed in its own manner in interrogation of the accused, nature of questions put to him and the manner of interrogation of the accused . 145. In fact, the Hon ble Supreme Court had settled the above aspect of investigation way back in the case of State of Bihar v. P P Sharma 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 222, and Dukhishyam Benupani, Asst. Director, Enforcement Directorate (FERA) v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law as any other common citizen without creating a special class for them as all citizens are equal in the eyes of law. This is more critical when such persons refuse to assist but rather resist the investigative process, especially the process which has not been struck down by a Court of law as illegal. 77. Undoubtedly, every such person as any other citizen of India is entitled to the protection of law, however, the law will also equally apply to him, subject to any privilege if at all, in a case applicable to him. Needless to say, the protection as per law which is available to all citizens is also available to such members and public figures. Their standing in lives or being an elected representative of the people does not create a class or elite class entitling them to different treatment being extended under the same law. 78. Rather an electorate representative and his conduct in cooperating with the investigating agencies on public turf has to be equal, if not on a higher pedestal. Furthermore, the investigating agencies in India have a right to conduct investigation and to perform their duties on behalf of citizens of this country itself as in the present case, the elector ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ering and had been presented before the learned Special Court, and the Courts have to examine his arrest and remand in context of the law concerning arrest and remand, irrespective of the timing of elections. In absence of any mala fide intention on part of Directorate of Enforcement apparent on record, accepting this argument would mean that in case the petitioner would have been arrested in October 2023 itself, his arrest would not have been challenged on ground of mala fides since elections were not declared at that point of time. In case this argument is accepted, it would amount to accepting that in case a person delays presenting himself before the investigating agency, he can take advantage of the same and later take a plea of mala fides since the time when the investigating agency arrests him does not suit him either personally or professionally. 152. Sh. Kejriwal also must have been aware about the impending Lok Sabha Election dates which were likely to be declared in the month of March 2024, which has also been mentioned by him in his replies to summons. Sh. Kejriwal would have known that when Lok Sabha Elections are declared, he would become busier than ever and would no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Enforcement was in possession of material against him regarding which he was being requested to appear before it repeatedly. 155. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that to hold that the timing was chosen by the investigating agency will be accepting a misplaced argument. It was the petitioner himself who had delayed the investigation to the point of time of his arrest, when the Courts had refused to grant him relief from arrest, or from joining investigation. Therefore, there is nothing before this Court to reach a conclusion that the timing of arrest was deliberate by the Directorate of Enforcement, and that conduct of Sh. Kejriwal was not responsible for a situation in which there was no other option other than to arrest to make him join the investigation. 156. The contention of Sh. Singhvi that the petitioner has been put in jail deliberately so that he is put at disadvantage during an election process is nothing but reiteration, in other words, of the argument that his arrest is mala fide and illegal by sheer timing of the arrest and therefore, will invite the same finding as on the subject of timing of arrest. To reiterate, this Court holds that the issue of arrest h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... constantly trying to get the petitioner to join investigation as his name was mentioned in many statements of the witnesses including the approvers. The Directorate of Enforcement needed to question Sh. Kejriwal as the witnesses, approvers, and the record pointed out that his name and role had figured in many statements which warranted his investigation. It was Sh. Kejriwal who himself delayed joining investigation for the last about six months on one pretext or the other. This Court is also of the opinion that the other co-accused(s) who are in judicial custody even their incarceration and each day in jail was prolonged due to delay caused in joining investigation by Sh. Kejriwal, as well as causing delay in conclusion of investigation, as a consequence of which the trial could not commence yet. 162. The conduct of the petitioner Sh. Kejriwal of not joining investigation left little option with the Directorate of Enforcement other than his arrest for the purpose of investigation of a pending case, in which other co-accused are in judicial custody, and the investigating agency is also running against time in view of the order of the Hon ble Supreme Court vide which it was ordered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch in turn is basic structure of the Constitution of India. 168. In this Court s opinion, the Courts of law are one of the pillars of democracy. Judges, as custodians of justice, are bound by the law and not by political considerations. The independence of the judiciary not only refers to judgments independent of hidden or apparent biases but also independent of the effect of political affiliations of those who appear and are parties before them. The oath of a judge binds her to the Constitution through its words which always resound in her ears and are etched in her mind. 169. In this regard, this Court notes that the judiciary is tasked with interpreting laws and adjudicating matters before it based on the existing laws and precedents alone, rather than the political considerations. While adjudicating cases, the Courts are tasked with interpreting and applying the law, rather than delving into the realm of politics. While politics may influence governance, it is not the purview of the Courts to adjudicate political matters. Instead, the judiciary remains steadfast in its commitment to the principles of law and justice, independent of political considerations. 170. At the heart of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egal principles and not influenced by extraneous factors. 175. Though Sh. Singhvi argued that he was not arguing politics but law, however, due to complexity of facts of the case which are intertwined with the political standing of the petitioner and the impending General elections, it was a difficult task. Despite the same, this Court has to adhere to its constitutional duty of applying law to the facts of a case, howsoever complex they may be sans the political equations between parties as the issue before this Court does not concern two political parties but an investigating agency on one hand and an alleged accused who happens to be a Chief Minister on the other hand. 176. The Courts have been and are better left untouched by political influences or interferences and their only and sole responsibility and duty is application of law enacted by the Parliament which is the will of the people. 177. In a nutshell, this Court is only following its constitutional duty of following the Constitution and the judicial precedents mandated by the Hon ble Supreme Court. This Court will therefore decide the case following this constitutional duty and will concentrate on the allegations and ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
