Arvind Kejriwal’s Judicial Custody in ED Case Extended Until May 7th

In recent news, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s time in judicial custody has been extended until May 7. This decision was made by Special Judge Kaveri Baweja of the Rouse Avenue Court. Kejriwal was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on March 21 in connection with a money laundering case related to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam.

The arrest came shortly after his plea for protection from arrest was denied by the Delhi High Court. Since then, he has been in custody, with his time extended multiple times. Initially, he was remanded to ED custody till March 28, then further extended, and eventually put into judicial custody till April 15, which has now been extended till May 7.

The case revolves around allegations of irregularities in the Delhi Excise Policy for 2021-22. It’s said that a criminal conspiracy was orchestrated by AAP leaders, including former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, along with some unnamed private individuals or entities, during the formulation of the policy. The alleged conspiracy aimed to benefit certain licensees and conspirators after the tender process, exploiting intentional loopholes in the policy.

Kejriwal’s arrest is significant as it’s the first time a sitting Chief Minister in India has been imprisoned while in office. Several other AAP leaders, including Sisodia and Member of Parliament Sanjay Singh, have also been arrested in connection with the case. Singh, however, obtained bail from the Supreme Court on April 2.

This legal saga has involved numerous rounds of litigation before both the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court, in addition to hearings at the trial court in the Rouse Avenue Court complex in Delhi. Recently, the Delhi High Court dismissed Kejriwal’s plea challenging his arrest by the ED and upheld the various remand orders, including the one that sent him to judicial custody.

Overall, the case has drawn considerable attention due to its political implications and the involvement of high-profile figures. As it continues to unfold, it sheds light on the complexities of governance and the legal system in India.

Delhi High Court Rejects Third Petition to Remove Arvind Kejriwal as Chief Minister, Labels it a ‘Publicity Interest Petition’

The Delhi High Court had some stern words for a former member of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), Sandeep Kumar, who tried to get Arvind Kejriwal ousted as Chief Minister (CM) of Delhi. Kumar’s move came after Kejriwal got arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case linked to the Delhi excise policy scam.

The Court wasn’t too pleased with Kumar’s petition, especially since two similar ones had already been thrown out earlier by the High Court. Justice Subramonium Prasad, the judge overseeing the case, criticized Kumar for wasting the Court’s time with what he called a “publicity interest petition.” He even suggested that Kumar should be slapped with hefty fines for his actions.

This wasn’t the first time the Court had to deal with attempts to remove Kejriwal from his position. Just a few days before Kumar’s attempt, another person named Surjit Singh Yadav had filed a similar petition, but that too was rejected. The Court had then emphasized that such matters are usually left for the executive and the President to handle, not the Court.

Then came another attempt from Vishnu Gupta, the president of the Hindu Sena, who also tried to get Kejriwal ousted. But the Court wasn’t swayed and essentially said that it’s up to Kejriwal himself whether he wants to continue as CM or not. However, they hinted that sometimes personal interests need to take a backseat to national interests.

Now, Kumar’s petition was the third of its kind. He argued that Kejriwal, despite being unfit for the job, was still holding onto the position of CM, causing all sorts of problems, including constitutional complications and violating people’s Right to Life in Delhi.

Kumar wanted the Court to issue what’s called a “writ of quo warranto” against Kejriwal. This basically means demanding Kejriwal to prove why he should be allowed to hold the position of CM under the Constitution. Kumar then asked for Kejriwal to be removed from his office, whether it’s with or without looking back at his past actions.

In simpler terms, the Court was not amused by Kumar’s attempt to remove Kejriwal as CM, especially since similar attempts had already been shut down before. They made it clear that such matters are usually left to the executive branch, not the courts. So, for now, Kejriwal remains the CM of Delhi, and Kumar’s efforts didn’t get him very far.