During Monday’s session, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal faced challenging questions from the Supreme Court, specifically about his failure to submit a bail plea before a trial court.
To Put It Briefly
- In the liquor policy issue, the Supreme Court will continue to hear Kejriwal’s appeal against his arrest.
- Kejriwal makes reference to several constitutional rights, like as the prohibition on coercion.
- Senior Advocate Singhvi contends that Kejriwal was unfairly targeted by the ED.
Tuesday marks the start of the Supreme Court’s hearing on Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s appeal against his detention in relation to a money laundering case involving the purported liquor policy fraud.
Arvind Kejriwal is being held in judicial custody since April 1 and is scheduled to stay there until May 7. The allegations against him are related to the excise policy that was cancelled in Delhi. During Monday’s session, Kejriwal was questioned sharply by the highest court, especially about his failure to submit a bail plea to a trial court.
Kejriwal’s attorney, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, said that the Chief Minister was not the target of the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) unjustified operations. “Mere non-cooperation with the ED cannot be a ground for his incarceration,” Singhvi stated.
Arvind Kejriwal made reference to his constitutional rights, which include Article 20’s prohibition on self-incrimination and Article 21’s guarantees of due process and liberty. He said, “I believe I have a right to not go [to the ED office in response to summons], I have a right to not speak against myself.”
Out of curiosity, Justice Sanjiv Khanna inquired as to whether Kejriwal had submitted a bail request to the trial court previously. In response, Singhvi said that no bail application had been submitted and that, instead, a writ petition contesting the arrest had been filed.
In response to questions from the bench regarding the reason behind the lack of a bail application earlier, Singhvi admitted the error and said, “I agree that I didn’t ask for protection from arrest earlier. I’m allowed to make mistakes in the law.”
Singhvi asked further about Kejriwal’s abrupt arrest, saying, “This is not how you treat a Chief Minister.” He is not a terrorist or a seasoned criminal who will board a plane and flee.”
In the meantime, the ED contended that prior to his final arrest, Arvind Kejriwal had disregarded several summonses. In response, Singhvi said, “Just because someone gets called doesn’t mean they’re immediately charged. I had responded in writing.”
The hearing was postponed for additional discussion on Tuesday since it was not decisive on Monday.
Also read | Arvind Kejriwal’s Related NewsÂ
