Become a member

Get the best offers and updates relating to Liberty Case News.

― Advertisement ―

spot_img
HomeScamsDelhi Liquor scam: SC Denies Immediate Bail to Kejriwal, Seeks CBI’s Reply

Delhi Liquor scam: SC Denies Immediate Bail to Kejriwal, Seeks CBI’s Reply

In his plea filed two days after the top court granted bail to former Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia in the related probed by CBI and the ED, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief challenged his arrest and subsequent remand orders, while also pressing for bail.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday denied immediate interim bail to Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, who is under arrest in connection with the Delhi excise policy case, even as it sought a response from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) before taking up the matter on August 23. Kejriwal has been in custody since March 21 following his arrest by ED, apart from a 21-day interim bail in May granted by the top court for Lok Sabha elections campaigning.

“We are not granting any interim bail at this stage,” remarked a bench of justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, in response to the arguments of senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who represented Kejriwal.

Arguments and Health Concerns

Singhvi emphasised the health concerns of the Delhi CM, pressing for interim bail. But the bench maintained its stance, opting to address the matter further only after receiving the CBI’s detailed response.

During the brief hearing, Singhvi argued that Kejriwal was previously granted interim bail on three separate occasions in the money laundering case, despite the stringent conditions imposed on bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). He referred to the Supreme Court’s interim bail orders passed on May 10 and July 12, as well as the regular bail granted by the trial court on June 20.

Questioning the Bail Rejections

Singhvi highlighted that the Delhi high court stayed the June 20 trial court order on an “oral mention”, questioning how Kejriwal could be denied regular bail in the CBI case when he was granted bail under the more stringent provisions of PMLA in an Enforcement Directorate (ED) case. The senior lawyer characterised Kejriwal’s arrest by the CBI as an “insurance arrest” made on June 26 just as Kejriwal was on the verge of release in the ED case.

The Aam Aadmi Party noted that Kejriwal’s application for interim bail is yet to be rejected by the Supreme Court, but the Bharatiya Janata Party stated that the apex court has found the CBI case strong enough to keep the CM in custody.

Legal Arguments and Comparisons

In his plea filed two days after the top court granted bail to former Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia in the related probed by CBI and the ED, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief challenged his arrest and subsequent remand orders, while also pressing for bail.

The Delhi high court on August 5 upheld Kejriwal’s June 26 arrest by a trial court, ruling that his arrest was neither illegal nor without justifiable grounds because CBI presented “evidently enough evidence” to warrant his detention and remand.

Sisodia Verdict and Fundamental Rights

In his petition before the Supreme Court, Kejriwal relied heavily on the Sisodia verdict, in which the top court held that the former deputy CM’s long incarceration of 17 months and his continued detention in a case where there was no hope of trial ending anytime soon impinged on his fundamental right to liberty and speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. The AAP chief’s petition argued that the grounds on which the court found it appropriate to release Sisodia on bail should equally apply to him.

It highlighted the Supreme Court’s observations in the Sisodia case that prolonged incarceration without trial could amount to a violation of fundamental rights, particularly when the investigation is largely complete and the accused has deep roots in society, reducing the risk of absconding. Kejriwal, through his plea, argued that he meets these criteria, much like Sisodia, and should therefore be granted bail on similar grounds.

Kejriwal’s Custody Timeline

Kejriwal has been in custody since March 21 following his arrest by ED, apart from a 21-day interim bail in May granted by the top court for Lok Sabha elections campaigning. On July 12, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the ED case, acknowledging that he had spent over 90 days in incarceration. Still, he continued to remain in custody due to his arrest by CBI on June 26 in the same matter.

The case against the CM stems from allegations of irregularities in Delhi’s now-scrapped excise policy of 2021-22, which CBI began probing following a recommendation by Delhi’s lieutenant governor in July 2022. Kejriwal was the third AAP leader arrested in this connection. Sisodia was incarcerated since February 2023 before he was released on August 9, and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh was granted bail by the top court in April, after six months of custody.

Claims of Persecution

Kejriwal’s petition also claimed that the CM was being subjected to gross persecution and harassment for wholly malafide and extraneous considerations. It also stressed that there was absolutely nothing on record to show as to how, why and under what circumstances CBI’s perception changed from April 16, 2023, the day when Kejriwal was called as a witness, to his arrest in June 2024.

The AAP in a response said, “The application for interim bail hasn’t been rejected by the Supreme Court. It has only issued notice for August 23… Everyone knows that this is a fake case with no recovery or evidence against any AAP leaders. We are confident that after the matter is heard by the Supreme Court, CM Arvind Kejriwal will get bail.”

The Road Ahead

The next few weeks will be crucial for both Kejriwal and the AAP. The outcome of the bail plea will have a significant impact on the political scenario in Delhi and the country. If granted bail, Kejriwal is likely to be greeted as a hero by his supporters and the AAP could gain significant political mileage.

However, if the court denies bail, the AAP may face a setback and its narrative of political persecution could be challenged. The case is also likely to drag on for several months, keeping the political temperature high.

The Supreme Court’s decision on August 23 will be keenly watched by political observers, legal experts, and the general public alike.