New Delhi, When the petition challenging the arrest of Arvind Kejriwal was heard in the Supreme Court on Friday, questions and answers took place between Enforcement Directorate lawyer Raju and the bench. The judge posed a barrage of questions to the investigating agency. Strong replies were also given from the ED side. In the end the Supreme Court said that it will take time to hear the case. Keeping in view the election campaign on the next date, both the parties should come prepared for interim bail. Let us tell you that Delhi CM has not filed a bail petition. He has challenged his arrest by ED.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi, on behalf of Arvind Kejriwal, first presented his arguments on the petition before the bench of Justice Sanjeev Khanna and Dipankar Dutta. After this, Raju started presenting his side on behalf of the investigating agency ED. The bench stopped the prosecution and asked what material do you have, which made the arrest of the CM mandatory. ED’s lawyer Raju argued that we have complete evidence available but we will reveal it only during the trial.
IO’s privilege…
The bench further said that reason to believe is defined in the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It is different from what we are used to in the Income Tax Act. In such a situation, evidence regarding the arrest should be available with the ED. Raju replied that there was no need to disclose the evidence. The bench said- Yes, you (ED) may be right in this matter. The arresting officer has to keep all the evidence in his possession. This means that he should be in possession of the entire material and not partially. Raju replied to the Supreme Court bench that it is the prerogative of the Investigating Officer (IO) to arrest the accused or not based on the evidence available against him.
FIRST PUBLISHED: May 3, 2024, 22:07 IST