New Delhi: The Rouse Avenue court docket in Delhi has issued a summons to Arvind Kejriwal for February 17. We let you know why this summons has been issued. Truly, the court docket has issued a summons to Arvind Kejriwal in a prison case beneath Part 174 of the IPC. The court docket stated in its order that it agrees with the criticism and details offered by the investigation company that there’s a prima facie case towards Arvind Kejriwal beneath Part 174 of the IPC.
What’s Part 174 of the IPC?
Truly, it’s a punishable offence to not seem earlier than a public servant (public servant) in defiance of his order. IPC 174 says that whoever intentionally fails to adjust to a legitimate summons issued by a public servant, he could be held responsible beneath this part. Underneath this, there is usually a punishment of as much as one month or a tremendous of 5 hundred rupees or each.
What did the court docket discover?
The court docket stated in its order that ED’s investigation officer, assistant director Jogendra, issued a discover on this case on October 30, 2023, through which Arvind Kejriwal was referred to as on November 2. On December 18, 2023, one other discover was issued, through which he was referred to as on December 21, 2023. On December 22, 2023, one other discover was issued, through which he was referred to as on January 3.
During which he was referred to as for questioning within the investigation happening beneath the PMLA regulation. In accordance with the regulation, the officer of the assistant director rank is a reliable officer to difficulty a discover. It has additionally been proved that Arvind Kejriwal had obtained these summons, as a result of he had additionally despatched his reply. Part 50 (3) of the PMLA regulation says that if anybody is issued a summons, he’s legally obliged to adjust to it. Why did the court docket difficulty summons
The court docket stated in its order that on the stage of taking cognizance, the court docket solely must be glad that whether or not there’s proof of the alleged crime and whether or not there’s enough foundation for proving the accused. Since on this case there’s proof of issuing summons and never complying with them, there’s enough foundation beneath Part 174 of the IPC.
