Delhi court summons Kejriwal in excise case, extends custody till Sep 11

A Delhi Court on Tuesday issued summons to chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and other accused while taking cognizance of the fourth supplementary chargesheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with the now-scrapped Excise Policy 2021-22.
Special judge Kaveri Baweja directed the accused to be produced before the court on September 11. Meanwhile, it also extended the judicial custody of Kejriwal till September 11.
CBI had filed its fourth supplementary chargesheet on July 30 naming Kejriwal, Pathak, Amit Arora, Vinod Chauhan, Ashish Mathur and P. Sarath Reddy as accused in the case.
The CBI in its chargesheet alleged that Kejriwal is one of the main conspirators in the case and had been in touch with the South group, which comprised K. Kavitha, Raghav Magunta, Arun Pillai, Butchibabu Gorantla, P. Sarath Reddy, Abhishek Boinpally and Benoy Babu.
It was also claimed by the CBI that the kickback money was spent according to the wishes of Kejriwal because the entire money was sent in the funds of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). The agency also submitted that Kejriwal had promised ₹90 lakhs to each candidate in the 40 constituencies in Goa.
The agency also alleged that Vijay Nair, the then media in-charge of the AAP, was appointed by Kejriwal and he was conducting meetings and demanding undue gratifications in exchange for favourable provisions in the Excise Policy.
It has also been alleged that Magunta Sreenivasulu Reddy had met Kejriwal in Delhi requesting him to provide support in the liquor business in the Capital city. It has been alleged that in the meeting Kejriwal had asked Reddy to provide monetary funding to AAP.
Elaborating on the role of AAP MLA Durgesh Pathak, CBI alleged he was made the in-charge of the Goa elections and all the money was spent on his instructions. It was also pointed out by the investigating agency that all election-related expenses incurred were dealt with in cash.
CBI has also claimed that Vinod Chauhan and Ashish Mathur were involved in the transfer of the money and Chauhan was coordinating with Kavitha’s personal assistant. The agency has alleged that accused Amit Arora was responsible for pressurising the officials of Mahadev liquors to shut in Delhi.
The agency further alleged accused-turned-approver P Sarath Reddy gave ₹14 crore to Kavitha under the guise of a land deal. It was also pointed out that he obtained five liquor vends in Delhi.
The 55-year-old AAP convenor was initially apprehended by the anti-money laundering agency on March 21, hours after the Delhi high court denied his request for interim protection from arrest — a stunning turn of events that left the Capital’s politics in turmoil and pushed to new heights the ongoing conflict between the Union government and the AAP.
He was later taken into custody by the CBI on June 26 from Delhi Rouse Avenue court and was later sent to judicial custody on June 29.
The Supreme Court granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the ED case on July 12, however, he is still lodged in Tihar jail as he was arrested by CBI.
He was earlier granted bail by the trial court in the case registered by ED on June 20 which was stayed by the Delhi high court on June 25. He was also granted interim bail by the Supreme Court on May 10 to campaign for the Lok Sabha elections. He later surrendered before the Tihar Jail superintendent on June 2.
Kejriwal had also approached the high court seeking bail in the CBI case and had also challenged his arrest by the agency. The high court, however, dismissed both his petition on August 5.
The case stems from Delhi government’s 2021-22 excise policy, which aimed to replace a sales volume-based regime with a license fee one for traders, and promised swankier stores, free of the infamous metal grilles, giving customers a better buying experience. The policy also introduced discounts and offers on the purchase of liquor, a first for Delhi.
The plan, however, ended abruptly, with Delhi’s lieutenant governor (LG) Vinai Kumar Saxena recommending a probe into alleged irregularities in the regime. This ultimately resulted in the policy being scrapped prematurely and being replaced by the 2020-21 regime, with AAP alleging that Saxena’s predecessor sabotaged the move with a few last-minute changes that resulted in lower-than-expected revenues.