CBI Arrests Arvind Kejriwal: How Does This Case Differ From ED's Investigation? Explained
cbi arrests arvind kejriwal: how does this case differ from ed's investigation? explained
New Delhi: Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was sent to the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) judicial custody until July 12 in connection to the liquor policy case on Saturday. This comes several days after his recent detention by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on March 21 for a money-laundering probe linked to the now-scrapped policy. Although he was initially granted bail, the Delhi High Court later put that decision on hold.
After the end of Arvind Kejriwal's three-day custodial interrogation, the CBI presented him in court, requesting a 14-day judicial custody. The probe agency alleged that the AAP leader was uncooperative and provided evasive answers during questioning.
What CBI Said In Its Remand Plea
In its remand plea, the CBI claimed that the Delhi CM might influence witnesses and tamper with evidence that had already been revealed to him during the interrogation, as well as potential witnesses who are yet to be examined. Kejriwal, 55, was arrested by the CBI on June 26 from Tihar Jail, where he was already in judicial custody related to a money laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate.
How Is CBI’s Investigation Different From ED’s?
The ED's investigation focuses on tracking the suspected money trail, while the CBI's case seeks to verify allegations of corruption and bribery involving public officials.
Kejriwal was arrested by the ED solely on charges related to money laundering. This was the only charge against Kejriwal, involving the alleged tainted funds. Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) defines offences as possession, use, claiming as untainted, or falsely claiming as untainted property.
In 2022, the CBI began a corruption case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, but Kejriwal was not named as a suspect. Later in March this year, during Kejriwal's custody by the ED, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju informed the Delhi court that being accused of the predicate offence was not necessary to be an accused under PMLA.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) claimed that money laundering is a separate crime, even if it's linked to another offence.
Why CBI Arrested Kejriwal Now?
While the CBI could have arrested Kejriwal, it required solid evidence directly connecting him to the alleged scam first. This direct connection is also under scrutiny in the ED’s case. The ED has alleged indirect responsibility, connecting Kejriwal as Chief Minister of Delhi and convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party to the alleged tainted funds, a report published by The Indian Express said. However, this approach may not apply in the corruption case.
Notably, due to the high bar for bail under the PMLA, prioritising the ED case allows for extended custody of the accused.
Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhari, representing Arvind Kejriwal, opposed the CBI's remand application, arguing that the probe agency had already filed four chargesheets and claimed that it was arresting him now to identify other individuals through him. He asked whether this was a valid reason for the arrest.
Kejriwal's lawyer further stated that the CBI accused him of giving evasive replies during interrogation at Tihar jail since the investigation officer wanted his admission of guilt.
Recently, the Delhi High Court stayed Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's bail order issued by the trial court, stating that the trial court should have recorded its satisfaction regarding the fulfilment of the twin conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) before issuing the contested order.