SC to decide Kejriwal’s bail plea on Friday

The Supreme Court will on Friday deliver its verdict on Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s petition seeking bail and quashing of arrest by the CBI in a corruption case linked to the Delhi Excise Policy ‘scam’.

A Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan—which reserved the verdict on Kejriwal’s petitions September 5 after hearing senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi on behalf of the AAP National Convenor and Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju for the CBI – will deliver it at 10.30 am on September 13, the Supreme Court cause list for the day revealed.

Asserting that he was not a threat to society, Kejriwal had on September 5 urged the Supreme Court to grant him bail in a corruption case linked to the Delhi Excise Policy ‘scam’ even as the CBI said he can’t be given special treatment just because he’s an influential person.

Five accused in the Delhi excise policy ‘scam’—AAP leaders Sanjay Singh and Manish Sisodia, BRS leader K Kavitha, AAP’s former communication in-charge Vijay Nair and Hyderabad-based businessman Arun Ramchandra Pillai—have already been granted bail by the Supreme Court in cases relating to the scam.

On July 12, the top court had granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the money laundering case but he continued to be in jail following his June 26 arrest by the CBI in the corruption case. However, if the Delhi Chief Minister is granted bail in the corruption case on Friday, he can campaign for the AAP in the ensuing Haryana assembly election.

On behalf of Kejriwal, Singhvi had contended that being a constitutional functionary, he was not a threat to the society or a flight risk. Singhvi had sought to highlight that Kejriwal was not named in the CBI FIR and he was not arrested for nearly two years in the excise policy ‘scam’. It was an ‘insurance arrest’ made on June 26 after he got bail in the “harsher” money laundering case, he had said.

The Bench expressed concern over the amount of time spent on hearing Kejriwal’s bail plea, wondering if such extensive hearings were afforded in routine bail cases. “Both sides we will hear… But we are wondering how long we should hear in a bail matter. Do ordinary mortals get this much time?” the Bench had asked as Singhvi went into details of the alleged illegality of Kejriwal’s arrest by the CBI.

“A bail matter has taken the whole day... the amount of cases we deal with... think of other litigants,” the Bench had said while reserving its verdict.

“I believe bail matters should be done on robust common sense... and not on hyper-technicality... You don’t defeat liberty by technicality,” Singhvi told the Bench which was hearing his petitions challenging the Delhi High Court’s August 5 order dismissing his petitions upholding his arrest by the CBI and denying him bail.

On behalf of the CBI, ASG Raju had raised a preliminary objection to Kejriwal directing approaching the Delhi High Court, bypassing the trial court.

Raju alleged there’s a Punjab angle to the Delhi excise policy as Mahadev Distillery was restrained from restocking unless bribes were paid. “Excise officers with ulterior motives closed down his distilleries… When he questioned it, the distillery owner was told that his problem “lies in Delhi” and that he has to pay bribe… Arm-twisting method was applied and the moment he surrendered, the license permission was granted to restart the distilleries,” he said.

“There was no exceptional circumstance to justify Kejriwal bypassing sessions court and approaching High Court directly for bail. The only exceptional circumstance is that Kejriwal is a Chief Minister, but that cannot be a ground for Delhi High Court to directly entertain his bail plea,” Raju submitted.

“There can’t be special treatment for a special person. There is no special person in law at all! All other aam aadmis (common man) have to go to sessions court…Why should Kejriwal be allowed directly to approach the High Court—just because he is influential?” he had contended.