As Arvind Kejriwal is “the sitting Chief Minister of Delhi and needs to campaign for the Lok Sabha elections,” the SC informed the Enforcement Directorate on Tuesday that it would hear arguments for an interim bail. As stated by the SC , “it’s not like he is a habitual offender” and this was a “extraordinary case”.
High Court Deliberates on Chief Minister’s Appeal Amidst Unique Circumstances
The statements were made during the hearing of the Chief Minister’s appeal, which was filed in jail, contesting his arrest on March 21 by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with the Delhi liquor policy case. The bench consisted of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta.
“This is a unique circumstance. It’s not as though he commits crimes frequently. Every five years, there is an election. It differs from crop harvesting, which takes place every four to six months. The bench stated that we must give it top priority to decide whether or not to release him in the interim.
The ED, however, rejected the court’s recommendation, claiming it would establish a “wrong precedent”.
“As opposed to regular citizens, politicians do not have any unique rights. Should bail be granted to all MPs and MLAs who are being prosecuted? It enquired.
Subsequently, the court called upon prominent attorney Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who was representing the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief, to address the concerns brought forth by the Enforcement Directorate.
Deliberation on Preferential Treatment and Investigative Process in Chief Minister’s Case
“Does a politician receive preferential treatment over the average person? Since 5,000 people are being prosecuted, what would happen if they all decided to run for office? The ED cannot be held responsible for the individuals’ decision to run for office; additionally, since no evidence has been presented, can interim bail be granted at this point?
The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) supremo’s delay in being questioned and investigated was another question the top court posed to Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who was representing the ED, during the hearing.
“When we started the investigation, Kejriwal was not the target of our inquiry directly. His involvement surfaced throughout the inquiry. That’s the reason no questions were asked about him at first. He was not the subject of the investigation, according to SV Raju.
The bench answered, “This is an uncommon case… Why were the questions not asked, and why did you take so long? We assume that no inquiries concerning him were made. The sole concern was the reason behind your delay.”
“It would have been called malafide” if he “started asking about Kejriwal at the outset,” according to the Additional Solicitor General. It requires time to comprehend. It cannot be left overnight. Everything needs to be verified.”
SC informs Arvind Kejriwal through his counsel that if he is released on interim bail, he shouldn’t discharge his official duties as CM of Delhi and he can only campaign for the General Elections.#SC #ArvindKejriwal #LokSabhaElections2024 #GeneralElections2024 #PowerCorridors pic.twitter.com/4762r9zJR9
— POWER CORRIDORS (@power_corridors) May 7, 2024
Also Read: AAP: Arvind Kejriwal’s health crumble under ED custody, sugar level fluctuates
SC Requests Examination of Files Related to Manish Sisodia and Sarath Reddy in Chief Minister’s Case
In addition, the SC informed SV Raju that it desired to view the file both prior to and following the arrest of AAP leader Manish Sisodia, the former deputy chief minister of Delhi. “There is one prosecution complaint after Manish Sisodia’s bail was rejected, Rs 1,100 crore attached,” he said.
The court questioned, “Mr. Raju, how did it become 1,100 crore in two years?” in response to this. You previously stated that the proceeds of crime were 100 crore.
“It’s due to the policy’s advantages,” SV Raju retorted. In response, Justice Khanna declared that the “entire profit is not the proceeds of crime.”
The documents from Sarath Reddy, the Hyderabad-based businessman who was detained in November 2023 but later turned approver in the Delhi liquor policy case, as well as those from before and after Kejriwal’s arrest were also requested by the SC.
We have proof that Kejriwal asked for Rs. 100 crore. He was not the center of attention at this early stage, and the ED was not looking into that. Only as the investigation went on did the role become more apparent,” SV Raju stated.
The Supreme Court hinted on May 3 that it might decide to grant Kejriwal interim bail due to the ongoing Lok Sabha elections, and that decision was made days before Tuesday’s hearing.
Arvind Kejriwal, who is currently being held at the Tihar Jail, filed a petition contesting his arrest and remand on April 9; the Delhi High Court denied it, and the day after that, Kejriwal approached the Supreme Court.
In addition, according to the AAP national convenor’s petition, his arrest was carried out “in a motivated manner” and was only the result of contradictory, “highly belated statements of co-accused” individuals who have since changed their plea to approvers. It has requested that the arrest be deemed “illegal” and that he be released.
