Arvind Kejriwal’s lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued in the Delhi High Court on Wednesday (3 April) that the criminal law is completely turning “on its head” by naming Raghav Magunta, Sarath Reddy and Magunta Reddy.

Mangunta Sreenivasulu Reddy is a four-time Lok Sabha MP from Andhra Pradesh’s Ongole and his son is Raghav Magunta, who was recently allowed to turn approver in the Delhi liquor excise policy case.

Singhvi argued that there was nothing against Delhi Chief Minister Kejriwal in their initial statements. However, after their arrest, they gave a statement against the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convener.

Raghav was arrested in February 2023 and in October 2023, his plea to become an approver was allowed as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) cited Raghav’s cooperation and his readiness to join the probe.

Singhvi further argued, “They are given bail without any objection. Then they get pardoned and approvership. Now, one of them is a candidate from the ruling party in the current elections. That is Magunta Reddy and the second one is shown to have purchased bonds, that is Sarath Reddy.”

The three persons named by Singhvi are part of a ‘south group’, which allegedly paid Rs 100 crore to AAP as kickbacks for liquor policy. Kejriwal was arrested on 21 March in the case and has challenged this in the Delhi High Court.

The statement comes against the backdrop that CBI did not oppose Raghav’s bail and that his father Magunta is now a Lok Sabha candidate from Ongole on BJP-ally Telugu Desam Party’s (TDP) symbol.

He won the 2019 elections on a YSR Congress Party symbol but recently joined the TDP. In 1998, 2004 and 2009, he won as a Congress candidate. This time he wanted his son to contest but with shadows of the Delhi liquor scam, he couldn’t secure Raghav’s candidature.

Singhvi claimed that three statements of Raghav Magunta are avoided, suppressed and not allowed to be used as exculpatory by putting in unrelied where he does not mention Kejriwal and called it a “fraud.”

Representing ED, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju objected to this saying that since the Prosecution Complaint (PC) has not been filed (equivalent to charge sheet), there’s no question of concealment.

Singhvi also said that the statements made by Magunta Reddy were to secure bail for his son and this statement is contrary to his earlier statements, suggesting a joke of fair play is being made.