‘Will you re-arrest CM?’: Delhi HC on ED petition to cancel Kejriwal's bail
Responding to the court’s query, Gurnani argued that the Supreme Court, while granting interim bail to the CM, had not declared the arrest as “illegal”
The Delhi high court on Wednesday asked the Enforcement Directorate (ED) if it intended to arrest chief minister Arvind Kejriwal again in the money laundering case registered in connection with the Delhi excise policy.
Taking note of the Supreme Court’s July 12 order granting interim bail to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief, a bench of justice Neena Bansal Krishna asked ED what would happen even if the court cancelled the bail granted to the CM by the trial court on June 20.
The court asked the question after advocate Vivek Gurnani who appeared for ED urged the bench to adjourn its petition seeking cancellation of the bail granted to the CM by the trial court saying that additional solicitor general (ASG) SV Raju was busy in another court. “He’s (Kejriwal) got bail, vis a vis PMLA (by the Supreme Court). I am confused, what do you want to do? If I cancel the bail, then what happens? Are you (ED) going to arrest him (Kejriwal) again?” justice Krishna asked advocate Gurnani.
Responding to the court’s query, Gurnani argued that the Supreme Court, while granting interim bail to the CM, had not declared the arrest as “illegal.”
Opposing the request, Kejriwal represented by senior advocate Vikram Chaudhari said that the probe agency’s petition was “sheer persecution” and “a classic case of illusion in the world ED lived in.”
Considering the contentions, the court expressed displeasure with the ED’s request but adjourned the petition for September 5. “You’re seeking 2nd adjournment. July 10th request (for adjournment) is from your (ED) side. He (ASG) is on his legs every time. You (ED) have to adjust your diary. When you (ED) take a date of your choice, please be present,” the bench said to Gurnani.
ED moved the Delhi high court in less than 24 hours after the trial court granted bail to the chief minister claiming the court order to be “perverse”.
The federal agency’s petition said that the bail order was passed without granting adequate opportunity to the probe agency to oppose CM’s plea, despite all courts up to the Supreme Court giving judicial imprimatur regarding the commission of the offence of money laundering against the accused in the excise policy case.
The judge also said the applications filed in the case confused her. “Is it for bail, illegal custody or compensation? I am confused,” she said.
Read Here | Arvind Kejriwal will not bow down in front of PM Modi: Sunita Kejriwal in Haryana
On July 12, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the money laundering case and referred to a larger bench for in-depth consideration of three questions on the aspect of “need and necessity of arrest” under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). But he remains in jail as he is in judicial custody in the Central Bureau of Investigation’s corruption case stemming out of the excise policy case.
The ED counsel clarified that last time a date was sought by the counsel for the AAP and not by the probe agency and urged the court to give a short date for arguing the matter.
On June 20, Kejriwal was granted bail by a trial court on a personal bond of ₹1 lakh. ED moved the high court the next day and contended that the trial court’s order was “perverse”, and “one-sided” and that the findings were based on irrelevant facts.
The high court, on June 21, imposed an interim stay on the trial court’s bail order till the passing of an order on the ED’s application for interim relief. It had issued a notice and asked Kejriwal to file a reply to the ED’s petition. On June 25, the high court passed a detailed order staying the trial court order.
On July 10, ED sought adjournment to file its response to the rejoinder submitted by the AAP chief in response to the probe agency’s petition. On July 17, the court adjourned the matter for August 7 after Kejriwal’s counsel sought time to respond to the note submitted by ED.
Citing Supreme Court’s July 12 order granting interim bail to Kejriwal in the ED case, the probe agency in its reply said that multiple courts all the way up to the top court have held that there was material against the former which shows that there are reasons to believe that he was guilty of the offence of money laundering.
Kejriwal was arrested by ED and CBI on March 21 and June 26 in the money laundering and corruption cases.