New Delhi: Defining the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) as a “company” and holding its national convener responsible for the use of alleged proceeds of crime in the 2022 Goa assembly elections — this is one of the two main points the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED’s) case against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal hinges on.
The other is the central agency’s claim that he is the “kingpin” and “key conspirator” in the excise policy case.
A Delhi court sent Kejriwal to six days’ ED custody Friday, a day after he was arrested by the agency following several hours of questioning at his residence.
During court proceedings Friday, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju said the AAP should be treated as a company as it too is an “association of individuals”. Therefore, Raju argued, Kejriwal was liable to face action under the provisions of Section 70 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) as the party was the ultimate beneficiary of the “proceeds of crime” and the Delhi CM, as national convener, was the ultimate decision-making authority for usage of the “proceeds of crime”.
Probing the Delhi excise policy case, the ED has accused AAP of providing undue benefits to liquor vendor licensees in lieu of “kickbacks” and “commissions”, which it says were used by the party in the Punjab and Goa elections.
Notably, while hearing the bail application of former Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia, who too is an accused in the case, the Supreme Court had on 4 October last year asked Raju, who was representing the ED, why the AAP had not been made an accused in the case if the agency had found it to be the beneficiary of the alleged liquor scam.
“A political party is said to be the beneficiary of this, but it is neither an accused nor impleaded in the case. How do you answer that?” Justice Sanjiv Khanna had asked Raju.
In a subsequent hearing on 16 October, Raju had told the court that the agency was considering making AAP an accused under Section 70 of the PMLA that deals with offences amounting to money laundering committed by companies.
“We are considering making AAP an accused invoking Section 70 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act to probe it additionally for being vicariously liable. We have taken a decision in this regard,” ASG Raju had told the court.
‘AAP an association of individuals, hence a company’
In the remand application moved before the special CBI judge to seek Kejriwal’s custody, a copy of which ThePrint has accessed, the federal probe agency has quoted the constitution of the AAP, including Articles 1 and 4 that give the national convener (Kejriwal) the highest rank in the party’s hierarchy.
The ED has argued that it is treating AAP on par with any company as it is an association of individuals and that’s how it is registered as a political party under section 29-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
“The AAP is a political party comprising of association of individuals registered under Section 29-A of the Representation of People Act, 1951. Under Section 29-A of the Representation of People Act, 1951, only any association or body of individual citizens of India can make an application for registration as a political party and since AAP is an association of such individuals, it got itself registered under the Representation of People Act, 1951, more particularly u/s 29-A,” the agency’s remand application states.
It adds: “As per the definition under section 2(f) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, ‘political party’ is defined as an association or a body of individual citizens of India registered with the Election Commission as a political party under section 29-A. Since AAP is also an association of individuals, it would fall within the definition of ‘company’ as contemplated in u/s 70 of PMLA, 2002.”
Kejriwal’s ‘dual liability’
Additionally, the agency argues in its application that Kejriwal was “ultimately responsible” for funds used by the AAP in elections and as the party allegedly spent Rs 45 crore which was “proceeds of crime” during assembly elections in 2022, he was liable to face action under PMLA.
“Arvind Kejriwal was at the time of offences under PMLA, in charge of and responsible for the said ‘company’ i.e. AAP for conduct of business of AAP. Therefore, not only the AAP but Arvind Kejriwal shall be deemed to be guilty of offences punishable u/s 4 of PMLA and shall be liable to be prosecuted and punished as provided u/s 70 of PMLA,” the agency’s plea says, stating the reasoning behind Kejriwal being liable.
“The contravention of PMLA, particularly offences punishable u/s 4 of PMLA, have taken place with his knowledge and he didn’t exercise any diligence to prevent such contravention,” the ED says.
ASG Raju further argued in the court Friday that Kejriwal was facing a dual liability in the case — first as the “kingpin” of the alleged scam and as “key conspirator” who himself made provisions benefitting certain private individuals in exchange for kickbacks, and second, vicariously, as the national convener of the party for its use of Rs 45 crore during the Goa elections.
“Arvind Kejriwal has also been intrinsically involved in the entire conspiracy of the Delhi liquor scam wherein the policy was drafted and implemented in a manner wherein certain private persons were favoured and benefitted in a quid pro quo of receiving kickbacks,” the agency argued in its remand application.
The application further said: “Due to the actions of Shri Arvind Kejriwal involving excise policy formulation, hatching the conspiracy of kickbacks with the South Group members, and eventually using part of the proceeds of crime generated out of this scheduled offence in the election campaign of AAP for Goa assembly elections, it is clear that all these activities were not only done with his knowledge but also his active collusion.”
According to the ED, the “South Group” comprises arrested BRS leader K. Kavitha, YSRCP MP Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy, his son Raghav Srinavasulu Reddy and the director of Aurobindo Pharma, P. Sharath Reddy.
(Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui)
Also Read: Meetings in jail or constitutional crisis? Kejriwal’s arrest raises questions about who’ll run Delhi