On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court declined to order the release of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in connection with the alleged liquor policy scam, stating that it did not deem the arrest to be unlawful.
Additionally, the court emphasised that it was not within its purview to meddle in matters related to the issuance of election tickets or the purchase of electoral bonds.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma underscored that judges are obligated to abide by the law and are not swayed by political considerations.
Kejriwal was detained by the Enforcement Directorate on March 21, in connection with the alleged liquor policy case. Prior to his arrest, Kejriwal had declined the central probe agency's summons on multiple occasions.
The Delhi High Court, after a hearing on April 3, had reserved its decision regarding the challenge to the arrest of Kejriwal. Senior Advocate Manu Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, contended that ensuring fair and transparent elections and preserving democratic principles necessitates a level-playing field.
He raised concerns about the timing of Kejriwal's arrest, insinuating that it might be a deliberate attempt to disrupt the activities of a political party in the run-up to elections.
On the other side, Assistant Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the Enforcement Directorate, argued that the Aam Aadmi Party qualified as an entity under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act .
He highlighted Kejriwal's significant role as the national convenor of AAP, asserting that this position conferred upon him substantial authority, including oversight of the party's financial affairs.
Both Kejriwal and his party have vehemently denied the agency's accusations, denouncing them as a conspiracy aimed at discrediting the AAP leader.
Essential Business Intelligence, Continuous LIVE TV, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.
