New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgement on pleas filed by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal seeking bail and challenging his arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with an alleged scam in the now-scrapped Delhi liquor policy.
"Order reserved. Thank you. See you on Tuesday," a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan said as they finished hearing arguments in favour and against Kejriwal's plea. Arvind Kejriwal has already been granted bail in an Enforcement Directorate case related to the same alleged liquor policy scam. However, he remains in judicial custody after the CBI arrested him in its own case.
This was something that came up during the arguments on Thursday when the Supreme Court pulled up the CBI for arresting Kejriwal while he was in judicial custody in the ED case. The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan stated, "When you are in custody... if you are arresting him again, then you need the permission of the court. There is something in the criminal procedure code."
Meanwhile, appearing for Arvind Kejriwal, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi told the court that every other co-accused in the case, including Manish Sisodia, Vijay Nair, K Kavitha, had been released.
Arguing the case for the CBI, additional solicitor general SV Raju raised objections to the bail plea, stating that the case should not be considered on par with his co-accused in the liquor policy case. He further stated that Arvind Kejriwal approached the High Court directly without first going to the Sessions Court in seeking relief in the case. The Supreme Court of India reserved its judgment on Thursday regarding the pleas filed by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. Kejriwal is seeking bail and challenging his arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with the alleged scam involving the now-scrapped Delhi liquor policy.
Following the conclusion of arguments, Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan announced, "Order reserved. Thank you. See you on Tuesday." Kejriwal had already been granted bail in a related case by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) but remains in judicial custody due to his arrest by the CBI.
During the proceedings, the Supreme Court questioned the CBI's decision to arrest Kejriwal while he was still in judicial custody from the ED case. The bench noted, "When you are in custody... if you are arresting him again, then you need the permission of the court. There is something in the criminal procedure code."
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, pointed out that other co-accused individuals, including Manish Sisodia, Vijay Nair, and K Kavitha, had been released, highlighting a disparity in the treatment of Kejriwal.
In response, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the CBI, objected to the bail plea. He argued that the case should not be equated with that of the co-accused and noted that Kejriwal had approached the High Court directly without first seeking relief from the Sessions Court.
Omar Abdullah Files Second Nomination for Jammu and Kashmir Assembly Polls
CBSE Uncovers Major Irregularities in Surprise Inspections of Schools
