NEW DELHI: Big indication by the Supreme Court, as it had on Friday said that it might consider granting interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, in the Delhi excise policy case in view of the Lok Sabha elections.
The two-judge apex court bench, led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta, made this indication while hearing the argument and submissions from Abhishek Manu Singhvi for Kejriwal and S V Raju for the Enforcement Directorate.
The apex court, however, made it clear that it had not yet decided anything finally, as to give interim bail or not to him. It said that it was only informing the lawyers appearing for all the parties that if such a form of interim relief may be considered if the hearing is unlikely to conclude soon.
While asking both the parties -- ED and Kejriwal -- to be considerate enough, the court orally observed that this case may take a lot of time, so then we can might considerate grating interim bail at this stage, keeping in view the Lok Sabha elections.
The apex court fixed the matter for further hearing to May 7.
Claiming innocence in the case, Singhvi said that there are certain safeguards provided under the PMLA to prevent unjustified arrests. The ED is expected to act impartially and fairly, but in this case, this is far from truth.
A day after his plea was rejected by the Delhi High Court on April 9, Kejriwal had on April 10 moved the Supreme Court against the dismissal of plea of his arrest and remand in the Delhi excise policy case. His appeal challenging the rejection of arrest and remand, would be heard on Monday by the bench, led by Justice Khanna.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED), which is the probe agency in the Delhi excise policy case, has submitted a reply to the apex court saying that the accused, Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, had desperately tried to save himself not to appear before it, by allegedly evading the issuance of 9 summons.
The ED has filed its reply to the SC, after complying with the apex court's earlier orders which asked it to file its response on Kejriwal's appeal.
The ED, in its reply filed before the apex court sais that when Kejriwal could not secure a restrain order against his arrest from the Delhi High court, then the ED arrested him on March 21, for his alleged involvement in the Delhi excise policy case. "He is the prime accused in the case," the ED said.
The ED, in its reply also said that his argument was totally incorrect that before the election his arrest was to prevent him from participating in his party's election process. His plea was also wrong that he was stopped in participating in a constitutional democracy process (election) which is independent, unbiased and fair.
The ED also said that if there is enough of evidences against an accused person, whose political clout is huge, and the agency arrest him or her then one could not say that his arrest was illegal.
One also could not say that his or her participation in an electoral process would be adversely affected if arrests would be made against them. If these arguments could be taken into consideration, then no political leader would be arrested despite their involvement in cases.
On March 22, a trial court remanded him to six days of ED custody, which was extended by further four days. On April 01, he was remanded to judicial custody till April 15, and subsequently on April 15, he was sent to judicial custody till April 23. On April 23, he was sent to judicial custody till May 7.
The accused, Kejriwal claimed innocence in the case and had told the Court, during the hearing that the timing of his arrest right after the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) is to humiliate, insult, and disable him and his political party.
The ASG Raju, senior lawyer for the ED, said that there are sufficient evidences against him and he is the main criminal conspirator in the Delhi excise policy case.
The Delhi HC, in its order had said, "The arrest of Arvind Kejriwal was not in contravention of the legal provisions. The remand can't be held to be illegal."
"The material collected by the ED reveals that Kejriwal conspired and is involved in formulation of excise policy and used proceeds of crime. He is also allegedly involved in personal capacity in formulation of policy and demanding kickbacks and secondly in the capacity of national convenor of AAP," the HC judge had said in her order.
She went on to say in her order that the rigours of section 70 PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) are attracted in this case. Section 70 penalises offences by companies. When a company contravenes the PMLA, every person who at the time the contravention was in charge of conduct of business of the company will be deemed to be guilty, the court said in its order.
