In a legal maneuver, Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi and the head of the Aam Aadmi Party, has taken his case to the Supreme Court, challenging the Delhi High Court’s dismissal of his plea regarding his arrest in a money laundering case associated with the defunct Delhi excise policy.

Kejriwal’s legal representatives are set to present the case before a bench presided over by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, urgently seeking a hearing on the matter. The Delhi High Court’s rejection of Kejriwal’s petition contesting his arrest in connection with an alleged excise scam was a significant setback for him. The High Court concluded that there was no violation of legal provisions.

Alongside contesting his arrest, Kejriwal, who is currently incarcerated in Tihar jail, also contested his subsequent remand in the custody of the Enforcement Directorate. However, the court deemed this remand to be lawful.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma stated that the Enforcement Directorate possessed substantial evidence that led to Kejriwal’s arrest, and the trial court’s decision to remand him in the agency’s custody was well-founded.

“The court finds that Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest was not in violation of legal provisions. Therefore, the remand cannot be deemed illegal,” Justice Sharma declared while delivering the verdict.

The High Court criticized the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader, accusing him of involvement in money laundering both personally and in his capacity as the national convener of the political party. The court emphasized that the investigation into individuals of different societal strata must be uniform.

The case revolves around alleged corruption and money laundering in the formulation and implementation of the Delhi government’s excise policy for the year 2021-22, which was subsequently annulled. Kejriwal was apprehended by the Enforcement Directorate on March 21, shortly after the High Court denied him protection from coercive measures by the federal anti-money laundering agency. Following the expiration of his custody with the ED, he was remanded to judicial custody in the case on April 1 after appearing in the trial court.