Former Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal during the winter session of the Delhi Assembly on November 29, 2024. | Photo credit: PTI
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Saturday (November 30, 2024) told a Delhi court that the sanction obtained in a CBI case is comprehensive enough to cover not only offenses falling under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 , but also other potential crimes covered by other laws arising from related facts.
The ED’s submission came in response to a plea filed by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief and former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, alleging that he had not received a copy of the sanction order in a money laundering case probed by the ED. related to the CBI corruption probe in the Delhi Excise Policy case.
In his plea, Mr Kejriwal referred to a recent hearing in the Delhi High Court in which the Advocate General representing the ED had stated that necessary sanction had been obtained when the chargesheet was filed.
The central agency clarified that the sanction imposed in the CBI case was broad enough to cover not only the Prevention of Corruption Act but also other offenses that could arise out of the facts and circumstances presented and was sufficient for the court to take cognizance of such other crimes. violations.
After considering the ED’s argument, Justice Kaveri Baweja of the Rouse Avenue Court dismissed Mr. Kejriwal rejected.
Case in the Delhi High Court
Mr Kejriwal has approached the Delhi High Court challenging the court’s decision to hear the ED’s prosecution complaints in the excise policy case, citing lack of sanctions.
In his plea, the former CM has argued that the trial judge erred by taking cognizance of the offense under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA , without obtaining prior sanction under Section 197 ( 1) of the CrPC for the prosecution of the petitioner.
The plea stated that this point was important to consider as Mr Kejriwal was a public servant (Prime Minister) at the time of the alleged offence.
The HC issued a notice in the case on November 21. However, it did not grant any postponement of the trial proceedings and listed the matter for further hearing on December 20.
(with input from authorities)
Published – Nov 30, 2024 11:31 PM IST