In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in connection with the ongoing excise policy case. This decision comes after Kejriwal spent nearly six months in jail following his arrests by both the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in relation to the case.
Kejriwal’s legal team had filed a plea seeking bail, challenging the validity of his arrest by the CBI. In its verdict, the Supreme Court reasoned that Kejriwal met the three criteria necessary for granting bail.
The court’s reasoning centered around three key points:
1.
Questioning the Timing of the CBI Arrest:
The Supreme Court raised concerns regarding the CBI’s decision to arrest Kejriwal while he was already in judicial custody. Justice Bhuyan, one of the judges presiding over the case, noted that the CBI’s action seemed to occur only after the court had granted Kejriwal regular bail in the ED case. He questioned why, after 22 months, the CBI suddenly felt the need to arrest Kejriwal, suggesting that the timing of the arrest raised serious questions about its legitimacy.2.
Unlikely Trial Completion:
The court also recognized the likelihood that the trial in the case would not be completed in the near future. Therefore, they deemed that Kejriwal met the necessary criteria for bail, as the completion of the trial would be delayed.3.
CBI’s Justification for Arrest:
Justice Surya Kant, another judge on the bench, pointed out that the CBI had presented its reasons for deeming Kejriwal’s arrest necessary. However, he emphasized that there was no violation of the legal provisions related to arrest.The Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail to Kejriwal marks a significant development in the ongoing excise policy case, prompting further scrutiny of the CBI’s actions and the broader legal implications of the case.
