Delhi liquor scam: ED likely to file new chargesheet with AAP as accused

The chargesheet is in its 'final drafting stage' and can include names of 'four or five' additional accused individuals, supplementing those already mentioned in the preceding six chargesheets

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) is likely to submit its latest prosecution complaint, akin to a supplementary charge sheet, in the liquor policy scam involving Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). According to a report in The Indian Express (IE), this filing is expected to occur before May 15, adhering to the 60-day timeframe since the arrest of K Kavitha, a Telangana Member of the Legislative Council and a co-accused in the case, on March 15.

The charge sheet is currently in its "final drafting stage" and is expected to include the names of "four or five" additional accused individuals, supplementing those already mentioned in the preceding six charge sheets related to the case.

The IE report stated that in addition to Kejriwal and Kavitha, the forthcoming supplementary charge sheet is expected to include Chanpreet Singh, a political activist based in Goa. Singh, who was arrested on April 15, has been accused of overseeing the management of AAP's finances for the Goa Assembly elections.

Officials said that one or two additional individuals allegedly engaged in hawala transactions, conducted subsequent to AAP's receipt of "kickbacks," are also expected to be mentioned in the charge sheet.

According to ED officials, designating AAP as a defendant was an unprecedented decision, but they were supported by legal counsel. This action had been acknowledged by Additional Solicitor General S V Raju during proceedings in the Supreme Court regarding the bail application of Delhi's Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, who has been in custody since February 2023 in connection with the case, the IE reported.

On October 16 last year, the Additional Solicitor General had said before the Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S V Bhatti, "We (the ED) are contemplating making the Aam Aadmi Party an accused invoking Section 70 (of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act) to probe it additionally with respect to vicarious liability."

The IE report further stated that senior Supreme Court lawyer Abhishek Singhvi, who appeared before the apex court for both Kejriwal and Sisodia, said that AAP, a political entity, cannot be treated as a "company" under provisions of PMLA's Section 70. "These provisions of PMLA have never been used against a political party in the 20 years of the law's existence. (If the ED does so), the whole idea is to attach assets, freeze bank accounts, paralyse and decimate a political party. It will be unprecedented for democracy and in the history of the Income Tax and PMLA Acts. It will show that political activity can be emasculated on the ground of alleged financial violations and strategically invoked during elections," Singhvi said.

The ED said that AAP is a political party registered under Section 29-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. And since AAP is also an "association of individuals," it falls within the definition of "company" as contemplated under Section 70 of PMLA.

The ED contended that AAP, being a political party registered under Section 29-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, qualifies as an "association of individuals." Therefore, it falls within the definition of a "company" as stipulated under Section 70 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the IE reported.

According to the IE report, the ED had claimed that Section 70 described the offences by companies as: "Where a person committing a contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of any rule, direction or order made thereunder is a company, every person who, at the time the contravention was committed, was in charge of and was responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the contravention and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly."

In its case, the ED stated, "As per definition under section 2(f) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, a political party is defined as association or body of individual citizens of India registered with the Election Commission of India... the AAP is a political party comprising of association of individuals registered under Section 29-A of Representation of Peoples Act 1951... since AAP is also an association of individuals it would fall within the definition of 'company' as contemplated u/s 70 of PMLA."