Delhi Court to Consider CBI Chargesheet Against Kejriwal on August 12

The Rouse Avenue Court has scheduled August 12 to consider the supplementary chargesheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and five other accused in the excise policy case. Special Judge Kaveri Baweja deferred the matter for CBI’s submissions on the cognizance of the chargesheet.

On Monday, the CBI filed its final chargesheet, naming Kejriwal, Aam Aadmi Party leader Durgesh Pathak, businessman P Sarath Reddy, Vinod Chauhan, Ashish Mathur, and Amit Arora. The same day, the Delhi High Court reserved its order on Kejriwal’s regular bail plea in connection with the case. During the hearing, the CBI opposed the bail plea, referring to Kejriwal as the “sutradhar” (mastermind) of the case.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna reserved the order after noting down the submissions from both sides. CBI’s Special Counsel, DP Singh, informed the court that their investigation had uncovered more evidence implicating Kejriwal. The chargesheet, which includes six individuals, was filed within a month of completing their investigation. The CBI claimed that Kejriwal, as the head of the cabinet, signed and circulated the excise policy to his colleagues for their signatures in a single day during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Singh also submitted that an IAS officer under Manish Sisodia, C Aravind, testified that Vijay Nair brought a copy of the excise policy to be entered into the computer while Kejriwal was present. The CBI contends that this indicates Kejriwal’s direct involvement. Additionally, the investigation agency traced Rs 44 crore related to the case, which was sent to Goa. According to Advocate DP Singh, Kejriwal instructed his candidates to focus on contesting the elections without worrying about the funds.

Singh argued that although direct evidence might be lacking, witness testimonies and 164 statements made in court clearly indicate Kejriwal’s involvement. He asserted that such evidence emerged only after Kejriwal’s arrest, as Punjab officers would not have come forward otherwise. Singh stated that after the issue gained media attention, Kejriwal sought ex post facto approval from the council of ministers.

The CBI emphasized that while the High Court can hear bail applications under certain circumstances, it cannot be the first court for bail hearings. With the final chargesheet filed, the CBI is ready for the trial to commence, said Advocate DP Singh.

However, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, argued that the case represents an “insurance arrest,” noting that Kejriwal has been granted bail three times in the ED case. He highlighted that since Kejriwal’s arrest by the CBI, there have been no new developments or confrontations. Singhvi argued that the distinction between bail and writ petitions does not impact the case’s merit.

Singhvi asserted that there is no direct evidence against Kejriwal. He pointed out that while the CBI frequently refers to Vijay Nair as a central figure in the case, Nair had been granted bail in the CBI case long ago. Singhvi criticized the CBI’s portrayal of Kejriwal as the “Sutradhar” of the excise policy, arguing that the policy was the result of deliberations by nine inter-ministerial committees, involving officials from various departments, and was published in July 2021 after a year of discussions.

Singhvi also argued that while Kejriwal signed the excise policy, so did 15 other people, including the Lieutenant Governor. By the CBI’s logic, the Lieutenant Governor and 50 bureaucrats, including the Chief Secretary, should also be considered co-accused. He emphasized that he does not wish to implicate the Lieutenant Governor but questioned the CBI’s selective targeting.

Singhvi challenged the CBI to produce a statement not based on hearsay, asserting that after two years of investigation, the case relies on presumptions and hypotheses rather than concrete evidence.

Earlier today, the CBI filed chargesheet against Kejriwal and others in the matter. Recently, the Delhi High Court reserved the order on Kejriwal’s plea challenging his arrest by the CBI in connection with the excise policy case. The Court also reserved the order on Kejriwal’s plea for interim bail.

Kejriwal approached the Delhi High Court, stating that he, as the National Convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party and the sitting Chief Minister of Delhi, is being subjected to persecution and harassment for malafide and extraneous considerations. He seeks regular bail in this case and has recently challenged his “non-est and illegal” arrest as well as the “routine” remand orders passed by the Trial Court. The said writ petition came up for hearing on July 2, when the Court issued notice and listed the matter for hearing on July 17.