On November 14, 2024, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) legislator Amanatullah Khan was ordered to be released from custody by the Rouse Avenue Court, following the court's decision not to take cognizance of the supplementary charges filed against him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) concerning alleged irregularities linked to the Delhi Waqf Board. This ruling came just hours after the court stated Khan's continued detention would be illegal due to the absence of necessary sanction for prosecution.
Justice Jitendra Singh of the special court highlighted the lack of documentation needed from the government, which is mandatory under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) for prosecuting public servants. The judge indicated, "Keeping the accused in custody under these circumstances when the cognizance has been declined... is tantamount to illegal custody," thereby mandatorily requiring Khan's immediate release upon the presentation of a personal bond.
The case dates back to September 2, 2024, when Khan was arrested after the ED executed searches at his residence, leading to significant scrutiny over his tenure as chairman of the Delhi Waqf Board. Allegations include illegal appointments and the improper leasing of Waqf properties, which purportedly led to substantial financial losses to the government.
The ED's investigation had escalated following complaints dating back to 2016, which accused Khan of benefitting from illegal recruitments within the Board. The agency claimed he had concealed the proceeds of crime across various real estate transactions valued over ₹35 crore through alleged associates.
Despite the serious nature of the allegations, the court's ruling reflects broader criticisms directed against the ED's operations. While acknowledging substantial evidence to proceed against Khan, the court insisted it could not overlook the procedural lapses involved, which culminated from the agency’s failure to obtain the necessary governmental sanction to pursue prosecution.
Immediate reactions from AAP officials were swift. Senior AAP figure Manish Sisodia championed Khan’s release, asserting, "Despite BJP's lies and manipulation, truth has prevailed." He accused the BJP of misusing investigative agencies to stifle political opposition, especially against leaders from AAP. This sentiment was echoed by Sanjay Singh, also from AAP, who alleged the charges were politically motivated, stating such moves reflected attempts by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to dismantle dissent.
Opposition sentiments have heightened as AAP leaders recount what they term as retaliatory tactics emanated from the central government. Khan's release not only has spotlighted his individual case, but it also symbolizes the increasing tensions between AAP and the BJP, particularly against the backdrop of the upcoming electoral battles where investigative actions have sometimes been perceived as politically charged.
While Khan emerged from jail, the ED, undeterred, swifted to the Delhi High Court appealing the trial court's decision. ED counsel's petition underscored their urgent need to contest this ruling formally, seeking to keep the momentum of the investigation alive and maintain pressure on Khan and his alleged accomplices.
The supplementary chargesheet, spanning over 110 pages, outlined the allegations linking Khan to the misuse of his office and the financial chaos surrounding the Waqf Board—activities seen to enrich Khan and his associates illegally. The timing of this legal clash seems particularly consequential, as AAP braces for increasing electoral scrutiny.
Following Khan’s release, the political atmosphere has shifted markedly, drawing attention to how judicial outcomes intersect with party politics. The fate of Khan’s trial now remains under wraps as the ED continues to assemble their case, awaiting the high court’s next steps.
The intricacies surrounding this case highlight not only the challenges of legal prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) but also reflect on the larger narrative of political warfare, where even the courtroom gates appear to hint at the battlegrounds of electoral strategies and political legitimacy.
Overall, the scenario revolving around Amanatullah Khan encapsulates the contentious and often polarized nature of modern Indian politics, where accusations and claims are intensely debated not just within judicial settings but also across broader public and political domains.
