On Wednesday, a Delhi court extended Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's judicial custody until September 25 in connection with the alleged liquor policy scam. Mr. Kejriwal appeared before the Rouse Avenue Court via video conferencing from Tihar Jail, as his previous period of judicial custody had expired.
During the brief hearing, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) assured the court that it would provide the accused with a soft copy of the charge sheet and a hard copy within 3-4 days.
Last week, Special Judge Kaveri Baweja of the Rouse Avenue Court took cognizance of the charge sheet filed by the CBI and issued a production warrant for Mr. Kejriwal, scheduled for September 11.
Earlier, the CBI submitted its supplementary charge sheet to the court in the corruption case related to the alleged excise policy scam, naming Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and other accused individuals.
The Supreme Court has not yet delivered its verdict on Mr. Kejriwal's plea challenging his arrest by the CBI and seeking bail in the corruption case.
On September 5, a bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan reserved its decision after hearing oral arguments from senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief, and Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, who appeared on behalf of the CBI.
During the hearing, Mr. Singhvi argued that the CBI had not arrested Mr. Kejriwal for two years but made an "insurance arrest in a hurry" to prevent his release in the money laundering case. He further contended that Mr. Kejriwal, as a constitutional functionary holding the position of Delhi Chief Minister, met the triple test required for granting bail.
“He is not a flight risk, he will turn up to answer the questions of the investigative agency, and cannot tamper with documents, running into lakhs of pages, and digital evidence after two years," he submitted.
ASG Raju argued that Mr. Kejriwal's bail plea should be remanded back to the trial court, asserting that he should not have initially petitioned the Delhi High Court for bail. He explained that an arrest is typically part of the investigation process and does not ordinarily require court permission. However, in this case, an arrest was made pursuant to a court order, meaning the accused cannot claim a violation of fundamental rights.
In his special leave petition to the Supreme Court, Mr. Kejriwal challenged his arrest and subsequent remand orders while also seeking bail in the corruption case. The CBI opposed his plea, claiming that Mr. Kejriwal was trying to politicize the matter despite various court orders indicating prima facie satisfaction with the commission of the alleged offences.
On July 12, the Supreme Court had granted Mr. Kejriwal interim bail in connection with the money laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). However, he was unable to leave jail due to his subsequent arrest by the CBI.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy