New Delhi : Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has once again evaded appearing before the Enforcement Directorate, ignoring the sixth summons in the ongoing probe related to the Delhi excise policy case. This repeated defiance has triggered a legal standoff, with the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) firmly stating that the issue is now under judicial purview.
The AAP, in a strongly-worded statement, reiterated its stance, denouncing the legality of the summonses issued to Kejriwal. "The Enforcement Directorate itself approached the court. Instead of sending summons again and again, the ED should wait for the court's decision," the party asserted.
Amid escalating tensions between the ruling party in Delhi and the enforcement agency, the court's role has become pivotal. Sources revealed that the court, acknowledging Kejriwal's persistent absence, recognized his act as a punishable offense, setting the stage for potential legal action against him.
The series of summonses sent to Kejriwal span over several months, with the most recent one dated February 14, mandating his presence on February 19. Enforcement Directorate sources disclosed that a complaint under Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) has been lodged against Kejriwal for his deliberate non-compliance with the initial three summonses.
Kejriwal, on his part, has maintained that the summonses were both "illegal" and "politically motivated." His non-attendance has sparked a legal debate, with the focus shifting to the validity of the summonses and the Chief Minister's alleged intentional defiance.
In a recent development, a Delhi court granted Kejriwal permission to appear physically on March 16 in connection with the Enforcement Directorate's complaint. This decision came after Kejriwal cited his commitment to a trust motion debate in the Assembly and the ongoing Budget session, which concludes on March 1.
However, despite the court's accommodation of his schedule, the legal saga surrounding Kejriwal's non-compliance persists. The AAP supremo faces charges under Section 174 of the IPC and Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, underscoring the gravity of the situation.
As the confrontation between Kejriwal and the Enforcement Directorate unfolds in the legal arena, the implications for Delhi's political landscape remain uncertain. The standoff underscores broader questions about the intersection of law, governance, and political accountability in the national capital.