CM Arvind Kejriwal is summoned by the court in the Delhi excise policy matter on March 16 after an ED application

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal received a new summons from the Delhi Rouse Avenue Court requesting that he physically appear on March 16. This comes after the Enforcement Directorate filed a new complaint with the court, requesting that the AAP leader be prosecuted for allegedly ignoring several summonses he received in connection with the now-canceled Delhi excise policy.

The most recent complaint concerns Arvind Kejriwal’s failure to comply with federal investigation agency summonses number four through eight issued in accordance with Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The case was scheduled for hearing on Thursday before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) Divya Malhotra’s court.

Arvind Kejriwal attacked Prime Minister Narendra Modi in a post on X, claiming that the ED was being used to “harass” opposition politicians into joining the BJP.

The national convenor of AAP said that if he joined the BJP, he would no longer get notifications. In a previous court filing, the Enforcement Department (ED) requested that Arvind Kejriwal be prosecuted for failing to appear for the first three summonses he received in connection with the now-cancelled Delhi excise policy money laundering case.

This case (pertaining to summonses nos. 1 through 3) has been scheduled for hearing by ACMM Malhotra’s court on March 16, according to PTI, a news agency.

55-year-old Arvind Kejriwal has referred to all ED summonses as “illegal.”. When he had previously notified the agency, he might be questioned after March 12 using a videoconference connection.

He had said, “We have not done anything wrong, nor are we trying to hide,” during a news conference on March 4, the day the ED’s eighth summons stated he was requested to join the investigation.

In accordance with Section 50 (authorities to summon, produce documents, and give evidence, among other things) of the PMLA, the ED has filed a new complaint under Section 174 (non-attendance in obedience to an order from public servant) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 63(4) of the PMLA, which refers to “a person who intentionally disobeys any direction” along with Sections 190(1)(a) (receiving a complaint of facts which constitute such an offence) and 200 (evidence of witnesses under oath) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

The ED also pursued similar measures against Hemant Soren, the former chief minister of Jharkhand who was imprisoned. The JMM head was called to appear on April 3 by a Ranchi court, which found him prima facie guilty of ignoring notifications sent to him by the organization.

The ED’s charge papers in the excise policy case include many references to Kejriwal. According to the agency, the accused spoke with Kejriwal on the development of the excise policy for 2021–2022.

AAP officials Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh, party communications head Vijay Nair, and a few liquor merchants have all been taken into custody by the ED so far.

In its charge sheet, the ED said that the AAP had spent around ₹45 crore on “proceeds of crime” during the Goa assembly elections campaign.

The AAP has always denied the accusations that the Delhi government’s excise policy, which granted licenses to booze retailers, encouraged cartelization and favored specific dealers who had reportedly paid bribes for it.

After the policy was abandoned, Delhi Lieutenant Governor V K Saxena suggested that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) look into the anomalies in the creation and application of the policy. Subsequently, the ED filed a PMLA lawsuit.

Kejriwal took aim at the Centre in his post on X.

“Where would you go—to the BJP or to jail? is a question posed during ED searches. Those who decline to become members of the BJP are imprisoned. If Satyendar Jain, Manish Sisodia, and Sanjay Singh join the BJP today, they will be granted bail tomorrow. If I join the BJP today, even I would no longer get ED summonses,” he said.

The chief minister also said how strong and ever-changing time is.

The AAP said that a number of court decisions have consistently maintained that the ED is required to disclose the reason for a person’s summons.

“Unfortunately, the central government refuses to follow court orders and considers itself above the law,” added the statement.