What Enforcement Directorate Said

Suppose a political person commits a murder before the election. Will he not be arrested? Will his arrest harm (the election)? You commit a murder and say I cannot be arrested because it will violate..." Mr Raju declared, trying to draw a parallel to the corruption charges against Mr Kejriwal. READ | ED's Liquor Policy Kickback Charge In Court, "Lies," Says AAP The ED - which Mr Kejriwal earlier said had no real evidence of his involvement, much less his central role in the alleged scam - also insisted "a money trail is there... we have traced the money trail". The ED further waved away claims by Mr Kejriwal that his arrest and that of ex-Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, was largely based on statements by accused-turned-approvers. The AAP has pointed to a pattern - the first of multiple statements do not name party leaders, and it is only after arrest and questioning that the accused-turned-approvers change their statements. Responding to this - which question was also posed by the Supreme Court Tuesday, as it gave AAP MP Sanjay Singh bail - Mr Raju argued accused persons may change their statement after being presented with evidence. "When accused is confronted with material (then) they say 'I was wrong'." READ | AAP's Sanjay Singh Gets Bail After 6 Months In Liquor Policy Case "You cannot avoid statements and say, 'No, no... these cannot be trusted. Cash payment was made... cash that was not accounted for. Source of the cash was a bribe... it could be ₹ 100 crore or a little less than that. This has been accepted by the AAP candidate as well," he continued.