Apple Refuses To Unlock Arvind Kejriwal's iPhone Amid ED Probe. Here's What Went Down

The ED seized Rs 70,000 in cash and four mobile phones from the Delhi Chief Minister's home, one of which is said to be Kejriwal's personal iPhone.

Kejriwal faces charges related to money laundering connected to the controversial Delhi Liquor Policy case, now defunct.

Source : Getty

Apple has refused to unlock the iPhone belonging to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, stating that the device's contents can only be accessed by entering the password created by the user. This revelation comes amid investigations surrounding the Chief Minister, as reported by The Indian Express based on source inputs.

Why Kejriwal Didn't Share iPhone Password

The refusal from Apple came to light following a search by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) at Kejriwal's residence on the night of March 21, coinciding with his arrest. The search led to the seizure of Rs 70,000 in cash and four mobile phones, one of which is said to be Kejriwal's personal iPhone. Reports suggest that Kejriwal, who had powered off his phone, declined to provide the ED with his password, citing concerns over the potential exposure of sensitive information related to his political party's strategies and pre-election alliances.

Kejriwal Hearing: Here's What Happened So Far

The issue of Kejriwal's arrest and the subsequent legal battles reached the Delhi High Court, which, as of Wednesday, has postponed its decision regarding a petition challenging the Chief Minister's arrest. Kejriwal faces charges related to money laundering connected to the controversial Delhi Liquor Policy case, now defunct.

The court has heard arguments from both sides, with the proceedings marked by intense and sometimes heated exchanges between Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, and Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, representing the ED.

During the hearing, disagreements arose over the adequacy of documentation provided for the defence's case, leading to accusations of delay tactics. Noteworthy was the ED's comparison of Kejriwal's situation to hypothetical scenarios involving terrorists, a line of argument that Singhvi criticised for its absurdity.

The legal confrontation has highlighted the broader questions of privacy, legal rights, and the extent of law enforcement powers, especially in high-profile cases involving political figures. The court's pending decision is eagerly awaited, with implications for both the legal precedents and the political landscape in India.