New Delhi: Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, lodged in Tihar Jail in the Delhi Liquor Policy Scam case, did not get relief from the Supreme Court on Tuesday. A hearing was held for 3 hours in the Supreme Court on whether Arvind Kejriwal should be granted interim bail or not. From Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing on behalf of Arvind Kejriwal to SG Tushar Mehta and ASG Raju appearing for ED, they presented arguments for 3 hours, but in the end the Supreme Court had to reserve its decision. However, initially it seemed that the Supreme Court would grant interim bail to Arvind Kejriwal, but as soon as SG Tushar Mehta presented the arguments, it seemed that the matter was stuck. However, the Supreme Court can now hear the case on Thursday.
The hearing on Arvind Kejriwal’s case lasted for a total of 3 hours in the Supreme Court. During this, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Tushar Mehta presented many arguments in their respective favors. The situation reached such a stage that Tushar Mehta had to oppose Justice Sanjeev Khanna’s remarks. Tushar Mehta opposed Justice Khanna’s comment in the full court in which he had said that he is the CM of Delhi and it is election time and this is an abnormal situation. Tushar Mehta had argued that Arvind Kejriwal should be treated like a common man.
Kejriwal demanded Rs 100 crore… ED argued in SC, judge said – show the file of Manish Sisodia
What happened in the Supreme Court?
In fact, before reserving the verdict, the Supreme Court on Tuesday commented that it does not want Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal to discharge his official duties if he is released on interim bail in the money laundering case related to the Delhi Excise Policy scam. Because this will cause conflict of interest. However, Arvind Kejriwal did not get any relief from the Supreme Court and a two-judge bench did not pass any order on granting him interim bail to campaign in the Lok Sabha elections. It is important to mention here that Arvind Kejriwal was arrested in this case on March 21 and he is lodged in Tihar Jail in judicial custody.
Supreme Court’s decision reserved
While Arvind Kejriwal’s plea was being heard, a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Dutta reserved its verdict on the question of interim bail, saying that allowing Arvind Kejriwal to continue in office could have a ‘widespread impact’. Is. The bench told senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Arvind Kejriwal, ‘Suppose we grant you interim bail because of the elections. Then if you say that you will discharge your official duties, it can have a wider impact.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi ready to accept the condition
Justice Khanna told Arvind Kejriwal, ‘If we grant you interim bail, we do not want you to perform official duties, because it will create a conflict of interest somewhere. We do not want your interference in the functioning of the government at all. On this, Abhishek Manu Singhvi said that Kejriwal will not take any action on the file related to excise policy. However, he later said that Kejriwal will not sign any official file if released on interim bail, provided that the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi does not reject the decisions just because the file does not bear his signature.
Justice Khanna’s question to ED in Supreme Court on Arvind Kejriwal – How did the bribe of Rs 100 crore become Rs 1100 crore?
What did the Supreme Court say to Arvind?
After this, the Supreme Court told Arvind Kejriwal’s lawyer, ‘First we will see whether interim bail can be granted or not.’ At the same time, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing on behalf of the ED i.e. Enforcement Directorate, strongly opposed showing any kind of leniency towards Arvind Kejriwal due to the Lok Sabha elections and said that granting interim bail to the national convenor of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders. Would be like creating a separate category for. After this the bench said, ‘We are not going to look into whether this is a case of any politician or not. Each individual involved has some special or exceptional cases or circumstances. We are only considering whether this is an exceptional case in view of the elections or whether the person involved is in an extraordinary situation…that’s all. The bench said, ‘It should not be understood that we are saying that a different law is followed for politicians.’
Tushar Mehta protested
After this, SG Tushar Mehta again said that granting bail to Arvind Kejriwal on the basis of current elections will set a wrong precedent and others will also request similar exemption. He said, ‘The court is only referring to the unavoidable situation for a person. If a grocery shop owner or a farmer comes tomorrow and wants relief in some matter, the government lawyer will not be able to argue the case. I know these arguments are harsh. He said that as soon as the court considers giving relief to Kejriwal for elections, it will create a separate category for politicians.
Tushar Mehta gave arguments
Tushar Mehta further said, ‘At present around 5,000 cases related to MPs are pending across the country. Will all of them be released on bail? Is a farmer less important, for whom harvesting is the season of sowing? He said that if Kejriwal had cooperated in the investigation and had not ignored the nine summons, he would not have been arrested. The Solicitor General urged the bench not to make an exception for Arvind Kejriwal, as it would send a wrong message and demoralize the common man. He said, ‘Campaigning in elections is a luxury for a leader, but harvesting and sowing is not a luxury for a farmer. This is his livelihood.
Supreme Court made a big comment
During the hearing of about three hours, the Supreme Court said that Kejriwal is not a habitual criminal. The court said, ‘He is the Chief Minister of Delhi and an elected leader. Elections are taking place. This is an extraordinary situation. It is not that he is a habitual criminal. Normally, Lok Sabha elections are held every five years. Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the ED, presented the statements of witnesses and accused in the case in the court. After hearing the arguments and considering the note given by Raju, the bench asked why the ED took so much time to investigate the case. The court asked the investigating agency to submit files related to the case before and after the arrest of former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia. Later, the bench also asked for the files of the period before Kejriwal’s arrest, which are in several volumes.
What arguments did ASG Raju give?
ASG Raju told the Supreme Court that initially Arvind Kejriwal was not at the center of the investigation and later his role became clear. He claimed that Kejriwal had stayed in a luxurious seven-star hotel during the 2022 Goa Assembly elections and a part of the bill was paid by the General Administration Department of the Delhi government. Kejriwal’s main petition challenging the arrest is pending because it has not been heard. The case pertains to alleged corruption and money laundering in the formulation and implementation of the Excise Policy of the Delhi Government for 2021-22. This policy was later canceled.
Tags: Arvind kejriwal, CM Arvind Kejriwal, Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal, Delhi liquor scam, Supreme Court
FIRST PUBLISHED: May 8, 2024, 08:52 IST