In a massive relief to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, the Supreme Court on Friday (September 3) granted him bail in the CBI case related to the excise policy case. The verdict of the top court comes as a shot in the arm of the AAP which heads into the Haryana Assembly Elections with its topmost leader outside of the jail and up and about hitting the campaign trail. The The bench, comprising Justice Suryakant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, granted bail to Kejriwal, however, also imposed certain conditions for the bail, which included a bond of Rs 10 lakh and two sureties.
What are the conditions of Arvind Kejriwal’s bail?
- No public comments by Kejriwal on the case: Supreme Court – The Supreme Court stated that the conditions imposed on Arvind Kejriwal in the Enforcement Directorate (ED) case would also apply to this case as well. The court instructed Kejriwal not to make any comments regarding the liquor policy case and to cooperate with the trial court. The trial court will set the final terms for his bail.
- No entry to the CM office – Kejriwal is barred from entering the Chief Minister’s office and the secretariat, and from signing any files. Although Justice Bhuyan expressed objections to these conditions, he ultimately agreed with them.
-
Kejriwal is also restricted from communicating with any witnesses. If required, he will need to appear before the trial court and provide full cooperation.
-
Arvind Kejriwal must be present before the trial court on every hearing date until he is granted exemption.
What conditions had Supreme Court set while granting bail in the ED case?
- He will not go to the Chief Minister’s office or the Delhi Secretariat.
- He will not sign any government files unless absolutely necessary and (unless approval from the Delhi Lieutenant Governor is obtained).
- Arvind Kejriwal will not make any comments regarding his role in the current case.
- He will not interact with any witnesses and/or access any official files related to the case.
What did the judges say while delivering verdict in CBI case?
While delivering the verdict on Arvind Kejriwal's bail petition on Friday, the Supreme Court bench, comprising Justice Suryakant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, framed three key questions based on the arguments presented:
- Was the arrest illegal?
- Should the appellant be granted regular bail?
- Does the filing of the charge sheet change the circumstances enough to send the appellant back to the trial court?
Both judges unanimously approved Kejriwal’s bail, although their opinions on the arrest differed.
READ BAIL ORDER BY SUPREME COURT
Justice Suryakant's opinion
Justice Suryakant stated that there was no violation of Section 41A of the CrPC, and thus, the arrest was not illegal. Kejriwal is not to make public comments on the case and is expected to cooperate with the trial court.
He further emphasized, "We have considered personal liberty. The trial is unlikely to be completed soon. The remaining conditions will be set by the trial court. Keeping the appellant in custody on these grounds would be a mockery of justice, especially since he was granted bail under the more stringent PMLA."
Justice Bhuyan's opinion
Justice Bhuyan raised concerns about the timing of the CBI's involvement, stating that the agency became active after Kejriwal was granted regular bail in the ED case. "The CBI did not feel the need to arrest him for more than 22 months. This kind of action raises serious questions about the arrest, which merits consideration."
He also pointed out that the basis for Kejriwal's arrest was not sufficiently justified. He noted that citing vague responses does not justify arrest or continued custody. "The accused cannot be forced to make statements. The CBI, being the primary investigative agency, must not give any indication that the investigation was improperly conducted," he added.
"CBI should work towards changing its image of being a caged parrot," the SC judge noted.
