Excise policy: Delhi HC seeks Kejriwal’s reply on ED plea challenging his acquittal in cases over skipping summons
Arvind Kejriwal had cited reasons including elections to state Assemblies and the Rajya Sabha, and his obligation to perform duties as Delhi Chief Minister at the time, as reasons for skipping the ED summons.
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought AAP national convenor and former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s response on two pleas moved by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against his acquittal by a trial court in criminal cases pertaining to skipping the agency’s summons in the liquor excise policy case.
Kejriwal’s legal representatives remained absent before the court despite prior service of ED’s pleas. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma issued notice, to which Kejriwal has to reply by the next date of hearing on April 29, following brief submissions by ED.
ED’s counsel Zoheb Hossain argued before the HC that the trial court “committed a grave error” in acquitting Kejriwal, given the fact that the summons were received and responded to by Kejriwal is not in dispute.
He further argued that there are various judgments in which it has been held that when a document is not disputed, there is no requirement of proving it as per the provisions of the Evidence Act.
The ED had filed two criminal cases against Kejriwal, in February and March 2024, under IPC Section 174 (non-attendance in obedience to an order from public servant). Provisions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) provide the ED with powers to launch criminal proceedings under IPC Section 174 for intentionally disobeying summons.
On January 22, a Delhi trial court acquitted Kejriwal of the charge of disobeying a public servant’s order for skipping six ED summons.
The ED has since filed two petitions against Kejriwal’s acquittal in relation to the two criminal cases it had registered for skipping the summons.
Story continues below this ad
The trial court, in two orders, one dealing with three summons issued by ED in 2023 and another with three summons in 2024, all served via email, ruled that “mere non-appearance (following the summons) is not intentional disobedience”.
It further observed that the ED had failed to prove the emails through which the summons had been sent, and that such a mode of service was not envisaged under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act (PMLA), with CrPC provisions mandating physical service of summons.
Kejriwal had cited reasons including elections to state Assemblies and the Rajya Sabha, and his obligation to perform duties as Delhi Chief Minister at the time, as reasons for skipping the ED summons.
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More
