The Delhi High Court has reserved its decision on Arvind Kejriwal's plea for two additional legal meetings with his lawyers via video conferencing from jail. Kejriwal's request was contested by both the jail authorities and the Enforcement Directorate (ED). Justice Neena Bansal Krishna heard the arguments from both sides before reserving the order. Senior advocate Ramesh Gupta represented Kejriwal in the proceedings.
The jail authorities have already submitted their reply, stating that the current jail rules do not permit additional meetings, regardless of whether they are conducted physically or through video conferencing.
Advocate Zoheb Hossain, representing the ED, argued that Kejriwal's application is not valid since he is no longer in the ED's custody, having received interim bail from the Supreme Court.
However, Kejriwal remains in judicial custody in connection with a CBI case linked to the Delhi Excise policy. The ED's counsel emphasised that all accused are treated equally in jail, with only two legal meetings allowed for everyone.
Senior advocate Ramesh Gupta countered these arguments, asserting that there is no harm in granting Kejriwal the additional meetings he requested. He pointed out that the ED did not oppose similar facilities for other accused individuals. Gupta argued that Kejriwal is only seeking additional legal meetings with his counsel, which should not be a contentious issue.
Previously, on July 1, the Rouse Avenue Court denied Kejriwal's request for two additional meetings with his lawyers via video conferencing from Tihar Jail. Special judge Kaveri Baweja dismissed the application, stating that Kejriwal's counsel failed to provide convincing reasons for granting the additional meetings.
The judge noted that the grounds for the request had already been addressed in an earlier order and saw no reason to deviate from that decision. The court highlighted that a similar application filed by Kejriwal seeking the same relief had been dismissed on April 10, 2024.
The judge referred to the order dated February 22, 2024, which had granted additional legal meetings to co-accused Sanjay Singh, but differentiated it from Kejriwal’s case. The judge concluded that there were no new grounds to reconsider the earlier decision and dismissed the application.
Kejriwal’s counsel argued that he is involved in about 30 litigations across the country and requires the additional meetings to ensure a fair trial. They also mentioned that Kejriwal has been arrested in another case by the CBI since filing the application. Additionally, the order granting additional legal meetings to co-accused Sanjay Singh was cited as a precedent.
The court's decision on Kejriwal’s plea will be crucial in determining whether he can have the additional legal meetings he deems necessary to handle his extensive legal challenges.
The outcome of this case will likely impact the judicial approach to requests for additional legal meetings by individuals in custody, particularly in high-profile cases involving multiple litigations.
Follow us
