<p>New Delhi: Delhi Chief Minister <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/arvind-kejriwal">Arvind Kejriwal</a> on Wednesday contended before the Delhi High Court that the timing of his arrest in the liquor policy scam case, right after the imposition of Model Code of Conduct, was to humiliate, insult, and disable him and his political party in the forthcoming Lok Sabha polls.</p><p>Kejriwal claimed innocence before a single judge bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma who reserved the judgment on writ petition challenging validity of his arrest on March 21 and subsequent custodial remand.</p>.Excise policy case: Delhi High Court reserves order on plea by Arvind Kejriwal challenging arrest.<p>The Enforcement Directorate vehemently defended the arrest.</p><p>"In a case of terrorist who is also a politician, suppose, he blows up army vehicle and says I want to contest elections so you can't touch me? What kind of argument is this," Additional Solicitor General S V Raju asked before the court.</p><p>For Kejriwal, senior advocate A M Singhvi submitted, "This case reeks of timing issues. The timing issue ensures that I am (Kejriwal) unable to participate in a democratic activity (election processes) and also to disintegrate and demolish my party before the first vote is cast. This party already has an identity." </p><p>Kejriwal is currently in judicial custody. He was arrested on the night of March 21. On March 22, a trial court remanded him to six days of ED custody, which was extended by further four days. On April 01, he was remanded to judicial custody till April 15.</p><p>In his arguments, Singhvi said that the unique feature of this case was that there was no material or any kind of evidence in any manner against me supporting Section 50 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act.</p><p>"The arrest is done without any inquiry. No attempt is made to record a Section 50 statement even at my residence. There is no material to show proceeds of crime by me," he said.</p><p>Singhvi asserted that there was nothing against the petitioner. </p><p>"Some of the accused were arrested. First time they gave statement against me. They were given bail without any objection. Then they got pardon and approvership. The unique thing was that one of them is a candidate from the ruling party in the current elections," he said.</p><p>Opposing the submissions on behalf of the ED, Raju asked suppose a political person commits murder two days before the elections, this means he could not be arrested? </p><p>"The basic structure shouldn't come into play. Criminals are supposed to be arrested and put in jail," he said. </p><p>Raju claimed that in such cases, there was no infringement of the basic structure. </p><p>"His argument is he could not be arrested before elections? Why? If he is involved in crime, then surely yes. What kind of argument is this? This is a bogus argument. This has to be rejected," he said.</p><p>"Whether a statement is to be believed or not is a matter of trial. There is a material prima facie on record to show his involvement in the case," Raju claimed. </p><p>He said the ED's case was that he was arrested because of his role in dual capacity as Chief Minister and AAP convenor. Individually, also he was involved, Raju said.</p><p>Referring to Section 70 of PMLA on offences by companies, the ASG said the ED's case was that the Aam Aadmi Party is an association of persons/individuals and the company is not only a private limited it can also be an association of persons.</p><p>On March 27, the HC had declined to consider the plea by Kejriwal for interim release, saying it will be unfair to not to give an opportunity to the Enforcement Directorate to furnish a detailed response to rebut the writ petition.</p>
<p>New Delhi: Delhi Chief Minister <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/arvind-kejriwal">Arvind Kejriwal</a> on Wednesday contended before the Delhi High Court that the timing of his arrest in the liquor policy scam case, right after the imposition of Model Code of Conduct, was to humiliate, insult, and disable him and his political party in the forthcoming Lok Sabha polls.</p><p>Kejriwal claimed innocence before a single judge bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma who reserved the judgment on writ petition challenging validity of his arrest on March 21 and subsequent custodial remand.</p>.Excise policy case: Delhi High Court reserves order on plea by Arvind Kejriwal challenging arrest.<p>The Enforcement Directorate vehemently defended the arrest.</p><p>"In a case of terrorist who is also a politician, suppose, he blows up army vehicle and says I want to contest elections so you can't touch me? What kind of argument is this," Additional Solicitor General S V Raju asked before the court.</p><p>For Kejriwal, senior advocate A M Singhvi submitted, "This case reeks of timing issues. The timing issue ensures that I am (Kejriwal) unable to participate in a democratic activity (election processes) and also to disintegrate and demolish my party before the first vote is cast. This party already has an identity." </p><p>Kejriwal is currently in judicial custody. He was arrested on the night of March 21. On March 22, a trial court remanded him to six days of ED custody, which was extended by further four days. On April 01, he was remanded to judicial custody till April 15.</p><p>In his arguments, Singhvi said that the unique feature of this case was that there was no material or any kind of evidence in any manner against me supporting Section 50 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act.</p><p>"The arrest is done without any inquiry. No attempt is made to record a Section 50 statement even at my residence. There is no material to show proceeds of crime by me," he said.</p><p>Singhvi asserted that there was nothing against the petitioner. </p><p>"Some of the accused were arrested. First time they gave statement against me. They were given bail without any objection. Then they got pardon and approvership. The unique thing was that one of them is a candidate from the ruling party in the current elections," he said.</p><p>Opposing the submissions on behalf of the ED, Raju asked suppose a political person commits murder two days before the elections, this means he could not be arrested? </p><p>"The basic structure shouldn't come into play. Criminals are supposed to be arrested and put in jail," he said. </p><p>Raju claimed that in such cases, there was no infringement of the basic structure. </p><p>"His argument is he could not be arrested before elections? Why? If he is involved in crime, then surely yes. What kind of argument is this? This is a bogus argument. This has to be rejected," he said.</p><p>"Whether a statement is to be believed or not is a matter of trial. There is a material prima facie on record to show his involvement in the case," Raju claimed. </p><p>He said the ED's case was that he was arrested because of his role in dual capacity as Chief Minister and AAP convenor. Individually, also he was involved, Raju said.</p><p>Referring to Section 70 of PMLA on offences by companies, the ASG said the ED's case was that the Aam Aadmi Party is an association of persons/individuals and the company is not only a private limited it can also be an association of persons.</p><p>On March 27, the HC had declined to consider the plea by Kejriwal for interim release, saying it will be unfair to not to give an opportunity to the Enforcement Directorate to furnish a detailed response to rebut the writ petition.</p>
