New Delhi: The Supreme Court issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Monday, regarding a plea from Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who is contesting his arrest linked to the excise policy scam case. The notice was issued by a bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Gupta, who also scheduled the next hearing for the week beginning April 29.

During the proceedings, Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, requested an earlier hearing date. However, the court informed him that the scheduled date was the soonest available. Singhvi expressed his desire to present certain facts that would "shock the conscience of the court" due to alleged selective leaks, and asked for the matter to be heard the following Friday. Justice Khanna responded that while they could provide an earlier date, it would not be as soon as Singhvi requested, acknowledging the unusual nature of the case but not solely because the petitioner is a Chief Minister.

Singhvi highlighted that between the CBI and ED, there are two key documents – an ECIR and an FIR – and eight chargesheets, yet none of them name Kejriwal. He detailed that Kejriwal's legal troubles began in September 2022 and led to his arrest on March 16, 2024, during which time 15 statements were taken, with none directly implicating him.

The court instructed Singhvi to save his arguments for the next scheduled hearing. The timing of the arrest was questioned by Singhvi, suggesting it was strategically planned to hinder his ability to campaign post the implementation of the model code of conduct. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the ED, challenged these submissions, leading the court to proceed with issuing the notice.

Kejriwal's arrest on March 21 followed the dismissal of his plea by the Delhi High Court, which ruled that the ED had sufficient evidence for the arrest. He remains in judicial custody in Tihar Jail until April 15.

Challenging the High Court's decision of April 9, Kejriwal criticized the timing of his arrest as strategically during the election cycle and soon after the General Elections 2024 schedule was announced. He argued that the arrest was influenced by ulterior motives, relying on inconsistent and delayed statements from co-accused who had become approvers. These statements had been in the possession of the ED for nine months before his arrest, occurring just before the Lok Sabha elections.

Kejriwal also contended that statements under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) should not be seen as definitive truth and could be subject to court doubts. He argued that such statements, especially from co-accused turned approvers, should not be the basis for determining guilt. He added that the High Court did not properly consider the coercive methods possibly used by the ED in obtaining these statements.

In his plea, Kejriwal emphasized the critical need for the Supreme Court's intervention, arguing that his arrest not only unlawfully curtailed his liberty but also represented a significant threat to democratic principles and federalism, which are fundamental to the Constitution's structure. He warned that his continued detention could set a dangerous precedent, potentially allowing ruling parties to suppress political opposition through baseless arrests before elections, thus undermining core constitutional values.