New Delhi, The Delhi High Court on Thursday scheduled for hearing on September 9 Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's petition challenging the summons issued to him by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with its probe into a money laundering case related to with special policies.
A bench headed by Justice Prathiba M Singh granted four more weeks to the AAP leader to file a reply to the reply filed by the ED.
Senior counsel, appearing for Kejriwal, sought more time to file the reply saying there are certain changes in circumstances and they have not been given a proper legal interview, a plea which is pending in the high court.
"Let the rejoinder be filed in four weeks," said the bench, also comprising Justice Amit Sharma.
The ED lawyer had earlier said that the petition against the summons was infructuous after the agency's arrest of Kejriwal on March 21 in the money laundering case following the high court's refusal to grant him interim protection from coercive action.
On April 22, the court had given two weeks' time to Kejriwal to file his reply. At the next hearing, in May, the court gave him four more weeks to record his position.
The AAP national coordinator had approached the high court in the wake of the ninth summons issued by the ED asking him to appear before it on March 21. On March 20, the top court had asked the ED to file its reply regarding maintainability. of the request.
The next day, he asked the ED to also respond to Kejriwal's plea for protection from arrest, saying that "at this stage" he was not willing to grant him any interim relief. Kejriwal was arrested by the ED on the same night.
On June 20, the trial court granted bail to Kejriwal in the money laundering case, but on June 25, the high court stayed the bail order following a challenge filed by the ED.
On June 26, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) arrested the Delhi chief minister in the corruption case related to excise policy.
The ED has alleged that other accused in the case were in touch with Kejriwal to formulate the now scrapped excise policy that resulted in undue benefits to them and kickbacks to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP).
In his petition, Kejriwal also questioned the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) regarding arrest, interrogation and grant of bail.
He has raised several issues, including whether a political party is covered by the anti-money laundering law. He alleged that an "arbitrary procedure" under the PMLA was being used to create unequal conditions for the general elections in order to "bias the electoral process in favor of the ruling party at the Centre".
Stating that the petitioner is a "vocal critic" of the ruling party and a partner of the opposition INDIA bloc, the plea claimed that the ED, being under the control of the Union government, has been "weaponized".
A bench headed by Justice Prathiba M Singh granted four more weeks to the AAP leader to file a reply to the reply filed by the ED.
Senior counsel, appearing for Kejriwal, sought more time to file the reply saying there are certain changes in circumstances and they have not been given a proper legal interview, a plea which is pending in the high court.
"Let the rejoinder be filed in four weeks," said the bench, also comprising Justice Amit Sharma.
The ED lawyer had earlier said that the petition against the summons was infructuous after the agency's arrest of Kejriwal on March 21 in the money laundering case following the high court's refusal to grant him interim protection from coercive action.
On April 22, the court had given two weeks' time to Kejriwal to file his reply. At the next hearing, in May, the court gave him four more weeks to record his position.
The AAP national coordinator had approached the high court in the wake of the ninth summons issued by the ED asking him to appear before it on March 21. On March 20, the top court had asked the ED to file its reply regarding maintainability. of the request.
The next day, he asked the ED to also respond to Kejriwal's plea for protection from arrest, saying that "at this stage" he was not willing to grant him any interim relief. Kejriwal was arrested by the ED on the same night.
On June 20, the trial court granted bail to Kejriwal in the money laundering case, but on June 25, the high court stayed the bail order following a challenge filed by the ED.
On June 26, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) arrested the Delhi chief minister in the corruption case related to excise policy.
The ED has alleged that other accused in the case were in touch with Kejriwal to formulate the now scrapped excise policy that resulted in undue benefits to them and kickbacks to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP).
In his petition, Kejriwal also questioned the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) regarding arrest, interrogation and grant of bail.
He has raised several issues, including whether a political party is covered by the anti-money laundering law. He alleged that an "arbitrary procedure" under the PMLA was being used to create unequal conditions for the general elections in order to "bias the electoral process in favor of the ruling party at the Centre".
Stating that the petitioner is a "vocal critic" of the ruling party and a partner of the opposition INDIA bloc, the plea claimed that the ED, being under the control of the Union government, has been "weaponized".
