Around 150 lawyers from Delhi have written to Chief Justice DY Chandrachud expressing concerns over the Delhi High Court's ban on regular bail to Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal in the excise policy case. In the letter, they cited a 'conflict of interest' in the passage of the order on July 4, Thursday.
The letter read, "We are writing this letter on behalf of the legal fraternity in relation to some unprecedented practices being seen in the Delhi High Court and the District Courts of Delhi."
They said that Delhi High Court judge Sudhir Kumar Jain, who passed the order denying bail to Kejriwal, should have recused himself from hearing the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) appeal. The lawyers said that the lawyer representing the ED in the case was the judge's brother and hence, there arose a conflict of interest.
The lawyers claimed that Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain's brother Anurag Jain was the ED lawyer and this apparent conflict of interest was never declared. However, sources said that lawyer Anurag Jain is not handling any money laundering case related to the excise policy case. This representation was signed by 157 lawyers.
The lawyers also expressed their concerns over an alleged internal letter of a district judge asking vacation judges of subordinate courts not to pass final orders in pending cases during court holidays. The lawyers said that such a diktat was unprecedented. Raising the issue of Arvind Kejriwal's bail, they said that the judges are not finalising the bail in ED and CBI cases and are allowing long adjournments.
The representation is significant as it comes in the backdrop of the order of vacation judge Justice Bindu of Rouse Avenue Court, granting bail to Arvind Kejriwal on June 20. The Delhi High Court stayed the bail order on the appeal of the ED.
The lawyers said that while granting bail to Kejriwal, Additional Sessions Judge Nyaya Bindu also referred to the statement of the Chief Justice, in which it was said that subordinate courts need to make quick and bold decisions so that the high court is not burdened with cases.
However, the ED challenged the bail order in the Delhi High Court the day after it was pronounced. What made the ED's challenge irregular was the fact that it was filed even before the order of the Rouse Avenue court was uploaded on the website. The report also bears the signature of Sanjeev Nasiar, the head lawyer of the legal cell of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP).
Referring to the urgent listing, hearing and stay of the lower court's bail order by the Delhi High Court, the letter said, "This has never been seen before in the history of Indian judiciary and has caused deep concern in the minds of the legal fraternity."