SC hearing on Kejriwal: The Supreme Court will decide on Tuesday (May 7) whether to grant interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who is currently in Tihar Jail in the excise policy case. The hearing comes after Kejriwal filed a petition challenging his arrest in a money laundering case linked to the alleged liquor scam in the national capital. The verdict of the top court will decide if Kejriwal, who has been in custody since even before the beginning of Lok Sabha polls, will be able to campaign or not.
Arguments made in the court
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, while arguing on behalf of the ED, said that in this case, cash transactions worth Rs 100 crore were made through hawala operators.
The court asked the ASG how the bribe of Rs 100 crore became Rs 1100 crore in two years. In response, ASG Raju said that liquor companies earned a profit of Rs 900 crore from this. The court asked how the entire amount became the proceeds of crime.
ASG Raju said that there were no contradictions in the statements and cannot be considered in favour of the petitioner. He told the court that the investigation, when it began, was no focused on Kejriwal and his name popped up during the course of investigation.
"When we started the investigation, our investigation was not directly against Kejriwal. His role came to light during the investigation. Therefore, not a single question related to it was asked in the beginning. The investigation was not focused on him. A statement given under Section 164 of CrPC is an independent statement made before a Magistrate," he said.
Justice Sanjeev Khanna asked the ED that when the first arrest of a government official was made in this case. Raju said that it was on March 9.
Justice Sanjeev Khanna questioned the arguments of ED lawyer Raju," What you are saying quoting from the statements could possibly be your imagination that kickback was given."
ASG Raju said, "We are taking our investigation forward on the basis of these statements. We are also getting success in that".
The Supreme Court asked for case file from ED, and also asked for documents before and after registration of ECIR, arrest of Sharad Shetty and Manish Sisodia. The SC also asked for the file before the arrest of Arvind Kejriwal from ED.
Supreme Court makes reactions
The Supreme Court said that the investigation has been going on for two years. "It is not right for any investigating agency to continue the investigation like this for two years," the bench said.
Justice Sanjeev Khanna asked ED whether the political executive was also involved in making the policy. The court said, "The scope of our discussion is till the implementation of Section 19 of ED. Were the provisions of Section 19 followed in Kejriwal's arrest or not? You tell the court about this."
ASG Raju, "We came to know that Arvind Kejriwal stayed in a 7 star hotel in Goa during the Goa Assembly elections...its bill was paid by Chanpreet Singh, who allegedly accepted cash funds for AAP’s campaign...This is not a politically motivated case. We are not concerned with politics, we are concerned with evidence and we have it".
"We can show that Kejriwal demanded Rs 100 crore. In the initial phase, there was no focus on Kejriwal, the investigating agency was not paying attention to him. As the investigation progressed, his role became clear," he added.
Raju said that there is not a single statement exonerating Kejriwal.
Grounds of arrest and reasons for belief are same: ASG Raju
ASG Raju said that one need not assume that whatever the witness has told the investigating officer can mislead the agency... "Therefore, the investigation should not be conducted in such a way that we reach the accused first...there may be many obstacles..." he said.
He added that the grounds of arrest and reasons for belief are the same.
Justice Khanna said, "No, they are different"
SC asks when did Kejriwal's name pop up in case
The ASG said that if the agency started asking about Kejriwal in the beginning, it would have been termed as "maliciousness". "It takes time to understand the case, things have to be confirmed," he said.
Justice Khanna asked, "When was Kejriwal's name taken for the first time in the statements?"
ASG Raju said that it came up in the statement of Buchi Babu on 23 February 2023.
The SC asked the ED to tell the names and dates of four accused who gave statements against Kejriwal.
You're taking away a person's right to live: SC
After ASG Raju, SG Tushar Mehta started presenting the side of ED and said that such petitions should not be heard at this stage. The SC said," We are just setting the legal parameters."
Justice Dipankar Dutta said, "If there is material that points to guilt, and others that point to not guilty, can you selectively take some material only?" Raju said that it depends on the investigating officer.
Justice Dutta said, "Is this an administrative function? You have to balance both. You can't exclude a part. You are taking away a person's right to live".
"All facts have to be seen...The standard of arrest is very high," he added.
Kejriwal not a 'habitual criminal': SC
Justice Sanjeev Khanna said that Kejriwal is not a "habitual criminal". The ED lawyer said that "no wrong message should be sent from the country's biggest court" that a Chief Minister can "get a different treatment".
"Suppose if we reserve the decision then we will have to pronounce it. But it also has to be seen that this period will not return. We have been granting interim bail in exceptional cases. Arvind Kejriwal is not a habitual criminal," Justice Khanna said.
SG Tushar Mehta said, "No wrong message should be sent from the country's biggest court. It would be unfortunate if this happens. Don't make this an exception. This will discourage a common man. That means if you are CM then you will get different treatment. If this happens then every citizen of the country will file a petition seeking bail".
Justice Khanna said that people cannot be treated differently and the bench agrees with this. "We are in the Supreme Court, we can say that the arrest was correct and still grant interim bail and then correct ourselves," he said.
Tushar Mehta said that Kejriwal evaded summons for six months and had he cooperated with the agency earlier, he might not have been arrested.
"He went on meditation, kept postponing the summons for 6 months, if he had cooperated earlier, the arrest might not have taken place," he said.
Justice Khanna said, "He has the right to say that the arrest took place just before the elections. We understand your objections. 9 summons, 6 months, he has not appeared before the investigating agency, we are taking that also on record".
What had the court said in the last hearing?
The court on May 3 had said that it might consider giving him a temporary release due to the ongoing general elections.
"This may take time. But if the case takes time, we may consider the question of interim bail due to elections," Justice Khanna had observed in the previous hearing.
The two-judge bench made it clear that it has not decided in this regard.
"Please take instructions. We are not saying anything. We may or may not grant. We don't want either side to be taken by surprise," Justice Khanna added.
Kejriwal in Tihar Jail
The Supreme Court heard the plea by Kejriwal on his arrest by the ED on March 21.
On April 9, the Delhi High Court had upheld Kejriwal’s arrest and made sharp observations.
Meanwhile, Delhi court extended judicial custody of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal till May 20.
