Supreme Court Grants Bail to Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal in Liquor Policy Scam Case
In the big legal turn of events on Friday, the Supreme Court granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in a corruption case pertaining to an alleged Delhi liquor policy scam. The case relates to wide ramifications in political and public circles about alleged irregularities in the formulation and implementation of Delhi’s excise policy.
Conditional Bail Granted
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Surya Kant, granted bail to the Delhi CM with a bail bond amounting to ₹10 lakhs. The Court further ordered Kejriwal not to make any public comments on the merits of the case. The move comes in the backdrop of preventing the ongoing investigation from getting compromised due to public statements that may influence witnesses or disrupt the due course of law.
The court, while giving this judgment, has given weight to the personal liberty of an individual. Justice Kant, while pronouncing judgment, said, “Prolonged incarceration amounts to unjust deprivation of liberty,” indicating thereby that long incarceration without conviction might amount to a violation of fundamental rights. This judgment also led the way for holding that no legal embargo exists on arresting a person already in jail for the purpose of extended investigation.
The Liquor Policy Scam
It is an alleged scam related to the manipulation of the Delhi government’s excise policy with the intent of serving private liquor vendors and hence causing financial losses to the state exchequer. The two investigating agencies, the CBI and ED, had brought several key figures, including AAP members, in for questioning or arrest. Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest and subsequent bail form a critical chapter in the ongoing investigations.
Kejriwal’s legal team, led by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, has consistently denied the allegations, alleging political vendetta. Singhvi told the court that Kejriwal cooperated with the investigation and again questioned why the CBI did not arrest him for two years. Singhvi said his arrest was to prevent his release in a related money laundering case. We will consider each item in the petition in turn and respond appropriately.
Kejriwal’s Legal Defense
During the bail hearings, Singhvi argued that Kejriwal met the “triple test” criteria for bail, which are that the accused will not flee, will cooperate with the investigation, and would not tamper with the evidence. Continuing further, Singhvi said, “Kejriwal is a constitutional functionary holding the post of Chief Minister of Delhi. He does not constitute any threat to the investigation as he cannot tamper with the documents running into lakhs of pages and digital evidence after two years.”.
The defence also attacked the handling of the case by the CBI, saying the arrest of Kejriwal was an “insurance arrest” made in a tearing hurry to keep him in custody. Singhvi contended that Kejriwal’s arrest for “non-cooperation and evasive replies” will not justify larger detention, especially when the Supreme Court precedents have emphasised that cooperation cannot be construed as self-incrimination.
Countering arguments by CBI
Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the Central Bureau of Investigation, opposed Kejriwal’s bail plea. The investigating agency apprehended that Kejriwal’s release could result in witnesses turning hostile. “The AAP candidates who contested Assembly elections in Goa have appeared as a result of Kejriwal’s arrest. They will turn hostile if your lordships release Kejriwal on bail,” Raju argued.
The CBI further contended that the plea for bail by Kejriwal ought to have been heard by the trial court and could not have been filed directly in the Supreme Court. ASG Raju cited that arrest is a part of investigation, and that the court had already approved Kejriwal’s arrest which makes his plea of violation of fundamental rights untenable.
Recent Related Case Developments
This case forms part of a greater investigation into the alleged corruption in relation to the excise policy, in which several other AAP leaders are under legal scrutiny. Most recently, the Supreme Court gave bail in similar cases to senior AAP leader and former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, Bharat Rashtra Samithi leader K. Kavitha and AAP’s former communication head Vijay Nair.
The counsel for Mr. Kejriwal has also moved the arrest and subsequent remand in the corruption case, with Singhvi contending that the arrest was politically motivated, with an aim to dent Mr. Kejriwal’s image before the public.
Interim Order for Bail by the Court
The Supreme Court had granted Kejriwal interim bail on a money laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate. However, his release was not possible since already the CBI arrested him in connection with the liquor policy scam and kept him in judicial custody. Kejriwal’s judicial custody has now been extended by a Delhi court until September 25, while his bail in the money laundering case is pending further hearings.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail to CM Arvind Kejriwal in the case related to the liquor policy scam marks a new turn. Though Kejriwal’s legal team has been successful in securing bail, the larger corruption investigation remains in place, with further hearings and legal battles expected over the coming months. As this case unfolds, political and legal repercussions might come up for AAP Leader Kejriwal and his party related to Delhi’s future political dynamics.
Read more about related articles, just click here
