Supreme Court grants interim bail to Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, refers key questions on arrest powers to Larger Bench
Justices Sanjiv Khanna & Dipankar Datta [12-07-2024]

Read Order: ARVIND KEJRIWAL v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT [SC- CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2493 OF 2024]

LE Correspondent

New Delhi, July 12, 2024: The Supreme Court has granted interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the money laundering case filed by the Directorate of Enforcement (DoE) related to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. The Top Court also referred important questions of law regarding the power to arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) to a larger bench for consideration.

A division judge bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta noted that while the "reasons to believe" recorded by the DoE for arresting Kejriwal under Section 19(1) of the PMLA appear to meet the prescribed conditions, Kejriwal has raised some key arguments that require deeper examination.

The Apex Court observed that Section 19(1) of the PMLA prescribes stringent safeguards before the DoE can arrest someone, including recording "reasons to believe" in writing that the person is guilty of the offence of money laundering. The Court held that this power of arrest is open to judicial review to examine if the statutory conditions are met, though not a full merits review.

However, the Bench noted Kejriwal's arguments that the DoE had selectively relied on only the incriminating material in its "reasons to believe", while ignoring exculpatory evidence. While finding that these arguments require consideration, the Court held that accepting them at this stage would amount to a merits review. The Court also discussed the principle of "necessity to arrest" which has been read into arrest provisions, though not expressly mentioned in Section 19(1).

The Bench noted some decisions which indicate that necessity to arrest is an additional factor to be considered beyond the conditions in Section 19(1). In this backdrop, the Court referred the following key questions for consideration by a larger bench: (a) Whether the "need and necessity to arrest" is a separate ground to challenge an arrest under Section 19(1) of the PMLA? (b) Whether "need and necessity to arrest" refers only to the formal parameters for arrest or also to other personal grounds/reasons for arresting someone? (c) If so, what are the parameters to be considered by courts in examining "