In a significant development concerning the Excise Policy case, the Delhi High Court has reserved its order on Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea against his arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The court has also put a hold on the decision regarding his request for interim bail. This decision came after a thorough hearing led by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, who has decided to take more time before making a ruling.
During the proceedings, the court has scheduled July 29, 2024, for further discussions on Kejriwal's regular bail application. The CBI’s legal representative, DP Singh, argued that the petition submitted by Kejriwal contradicts the ongoing investigation's nature, claiming that it is not the right time to reassess the evidence as the inquiry is still active.
According to Singh, the investigation includes all necessary proceedings to gather evidence, emphasising that the CBI had substantial grounds for the arrest.
The CBI maintained that it is within its rights to interrogate and arrest individuals when there is a reasonable suspicion of a cognizable offence. Singh explained that Kejriwal’s evasive responses during his interrogation on June 25 prompted the CBI to consider custodial interrogation essential for uncovering the truth. The CBI also pointed out that current laws do not prohibit arrest in situations where there is reasonable suspicion.
On the other hand, Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, countered these claims vigorously. He described the arrest as an “insurance arrest,” asserting that there are existing release orders in Kejriwal’s favour.
Singhvi argued that the recent bail granted by the apex court further supports his client’s case. He highlighted that Kejriwal was initially summoned as a witness and was not named in the FIR filed in August 2022, raising questions about the legitimacy of the arrest.
Singhvi further argued that the timeline of events surrounding Kejriwal’s arrest raises significant concerns. He noted that a trial court had recently granted him regular bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, only for the CBI to seek his custody shortly afterward. Singhvi expressed frustration that Kejriwal was not adequately notified about the CBI’s application or given a chance to respond before the order was issued.
The advocate also referenced the case of Imran Khan, highlighting that such repeated arrests should not occur in India without just cause. He argued that the trial court allowed the CBI to issue production warrants even after extensive questioning, which he found unnecessary given the circumstances.
Kejriwal’s petition emphasises that he is being subjected to undue persecution as the National Convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party and the sitting Chief Minister of Delhi. He claims that the investigation against him is driven by malice and seeks to challenge what he describes as illegal arrests and routine remand orders.
As the court awaits more discussions on the matter, the political implications of this case continue to unfold. The outcome of Kejriwal's plea could have significant ramifications for both his political career and the broader political landscape in Delhi.
The Delhi High Court’s next steps will be closely monitored as both the CBI and Kejriwal's legal team prepare for the upcoming hearings. This case not only highlights the legal battles faced by political figures but also underscores the complex interplay between law enforcement and politics in the region.
Follow us
