Arvind Kejriwal, the Delhi Chief Minister, informed the Supreme Court in response to an affidavit by the Enforcement Directorate that his arrest related to the liquor policy case showcased the BJP-led Centre’s misuse of the federal probe agency and Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) to suppress its “biggest political opponent.”

Also Read: Gujarati Pani Puri Vendor, A Dead Ringer For PM Modi, Gains Popularity

“During a heightened election cycle with intense political engagement, Kejriwal’s counsel informed the top court that Kejriwal’s unlawful arrest has significantly harmed his political party and will unfairly advantage the ruling party at the Centre in the ongoing elections,”

In his reply, Kejriwal emphasized the circumstances surrounding his arrest, highlighting that the ED had detained a sitting Chief Minister and the national convenor of one of India’s six national parties.

He argued that this action occurred just five days after the announcement of the general elections and the implementation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC).

What did Arvind Kejriwal say in his affidavit?

In his affidavit, Arvind Kejriwal emphasized the timing of his arrest, stating that it severely prejudiced his party, especially during a critical election cycle. The Chief Minister also stated that his arrest would unfairly benefit the ruling party in the ongoing elections, compromising the principles of “free and fair” elections.

The Chief Minister’s affidavit stated that the illegal arrest of the petitioner clearly compromised a level-playing field, which is a prerequisite for ‘free and fair elections.’

Kejriwal further alleged that the Enforcement Directorate acted with high-handedness, asserting that their conduct during the investigation grossly disregarded due process of law.

He also accused the Enforcement Directorate of harboring “malicious intent,” pointing out the central agency’s deliberate concealment of statements made by co-accused who explicitly denied any wrongdoing.

Kejriwal’s response contested the basis of his arrest, asserting a lack of concrete evidence implicating him in any criminal activity related to the alleged offense under the PMLA. He also raised doubts about the validity of the statements obtained from alleged accomplices, which he characterized as self-incriminating confessions lacking corroborative evidence.

In its affidavit to the Supreme Court, the Enforcement Directorate stated that significant tampering of evidence, including the destruction of around 170 mobile phones during the period of the purported scam, necessitated Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest.

Authorities arrested Arvind Kejriwal on March 21 in connection with a money-laundering case linked to the now-scrapped Delhi liquor policy. Despite his arrest, the Chief Minister continues to run the government from jail.

Also Read: ‘Sikhs Were Unjustly Labeled As Terrorists And Killers’, 800 Sikh Community Members Join BJP In Delhi