The Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed AAP leader Sanjay Singh’s petition challenging his arrest as well as remand by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case related to the now-scrapped Delhi excise policy.
“At a premature stage when investigation is at a nascent stage, this court does not find any ground to interfere at all with order of remand or arrest. Dismissed,” the high court said while pronouncing the verdict.
AAP in crosshairs
The AAP leader has been in ED custody since his arrest on October 4. Mr. Singh, who is considered close to AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal, is the third senior AAP leader to be arrested in less than a year and a half. Former Delhi Public Works Department Minister Satyendar Jain was arrested by the ED on May 30 last year in an alleged money laundering case.
The ED probe is based on a case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation against the then Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and others on August 17 last year, on a reference from the Ministry of Home Affairs.
The case alleges deliberate irregularities in the framing and implementation of the excise policy and undue favours extended to licensees in the form of waiver/reduction in the licence fee and extension of L-1 licences without approval.
Mr. Singh’s counsel had earlier contended before the high court that due procedure was not followed when the Rajya Sabha MP was arrested by the investigating agency.
The counsel said the ED did not issue any notice or summons prior to his abrupt arrest. “I wasn’t called for any inquiry or investigation. Suddenly on morning of October 4 they (ED) came to my house and carried out searches,” the counsel had said.
Law equal for all
While pronouncing the judgment, the high court stressed that the law was equal for a public figure and any other individual, and a probe cannot be quashed at a nascent stage only because the accused is a public figure or because the pendency of criminal proceeding would adversely affect his political future.
The high court rejected Mr. Singh’s contention that the approver’s statement was extracted under pressure, saying the determination as to whether it was extracted under pressure cannot be gone into at this stage.
“There is nothing to suggest at this stage that the law agency used lawless means to achieve a pre-decided end and has extracted statement of approver. At this stage though accused is a public figure, that person stands on equal footing as any other accused,” the high court said.
