Arvind Kejriwal To Stay In Jail As SC Adjourns Hearing Interim Bail Plea, Next Hearing Likely On Thursday

The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned hearing interim bail plea of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the Delhi Liquor Policy Case.

The top court said that in case it grants interim bail to Arvind Kejriwal it does not want him to perform any official duty as the Chief Minister.

Source : PTI Images

The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned hearing interim bail plea of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the Delhi Liquor Policy Case. The top court said that in case it grants interim bail to Kejriwal it does not want him to perform any official duty as the Chief Minister. Following this, Arvind Kejriwal told the Supreme Court today that he is willing to furnish an undertaking stating that he will not sign any official files if released on interim bail. In another development, a Delhi court today extended judicial custody of Arvind Kejriwal till May 20.

A bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta said that Kejriwal performing official functions of a Chief Minister while on interim bail may have cascading effect.

"I will not sign any file but the Delhi LG cannot deny any permission taken by other officers in the government." Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi told the court on Arvind Kejriwal's behalf.

This came after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for Centre told the apex court that a law was brought in for appointment for personnel in administration cadre where the Chief Minister has to sign and only those files were signed by Kejriwal and he never signed any files.

In the last hearing the bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta had observed that as the arguments in the case are expected to prolong, the top may consider interim bail due to the upcoming elections on May 25. Today, the bench started hearing the interim bail plea after ED told the court that it needs more time to conclude arguments on legality of arrest. 

The court had further isntructed ED to take instructions on whether Kejriwal should be signing official files given that he is holding the position of a chief minister. Today, SG Mehta said that he does not have to sign any files. However, this claim was disputed by Kejriwal's counsel.

Advocate Shadan Farasat however told the court that there are official minutes of meetings showing that Kejriwal signed files.

The Supreme Court while examining the interim bail for Arvind Kejriwal had observed that if the AAP chief is released and allowed to participate in the general elections, and then he performs official duties it can have cascading effects.

"We make it clear, we don't want you to be performing official duties if we release you," Justice Sanjiv Khanna said during the hearing.

ED however opposed interim bail, stating that politicians cannot be treated as a class apart and that Kejriwal's case has to be considered at par with a common man.

In the last hearing, following the arguments made by Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, the top court questioned the ED, represented by Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, to on the timing of Kejriwal’s arrest. The bench also instructed the investigative agency to provide all material that was in favour of and against Kejriwal.

Today, the Enforcement Directorate placed a note in the Supreme Court saying that when it began investigations in the alleged Delhi Liquor Policy Scam, its investigation was not directly against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and his role came up during investigation. "And that is the reason why in beginning, not a single question was put regarding him to accused being questioned." 

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi had told the apex court that ED was concealing and suppressing statements made by approvers in favour of Kejriwal and selectively showing statements against him.

ED further contended that it is for the investigating officer to decide that at this stage, what statement is correct and what is not. "Factually there is no contradictions in statements. They can't be presumed to be in favor of petitioner." ED told the top court.

Justice Khanna, however questioned that why ED did not start investigating his role at the outset when CBI filed first case in August 2023. The ED said they had no reason at that time as they had to investigate where the money went and build up investigation.

On hearing ED's submissions, Justice Sanjiv Khanna reminded ED that at present, the issue before the court is on compliance of Section 19 of PMLA and the court wants answer on that from the ED.

Section 19 of the PMLA empowers ED officials to arrest persons based on the material in their possession, providing a reasonable basis to suspect that an individual has committed an offence punishable under the law.

The court said that it has to examine two primary questions -- whether the arrest was made in compliance of Section 19 and why the agency took two years to arrest Kejriwal.

Justice Khanna said, "it is not good for any investigating agency to say that it takes 2 years to unearth role."

Senior Advocate Singhvi, appearing for Arvind Kejriwal, contended that Kejriwal's arrest was illegal as his arrest did not meet the criteria required under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, (PMLA) 2002.