No release for Kejriwal as HC stays bail verdict

The Delhi high court on Tuesday stayed a lower court’s order granting bail to Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal in a money laundering case, calling the decision “perverse” and criticising the trial court for inadequately considering evidence presented by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain, in a 34-page ruling, said the trial court failed to properly evaluate thousands of pages of documents submitted by ED, which alleged Kejriwal’s vicarious liability — as the convener of the party — for money laundering offenses committed by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP).

“The perusal of the impugned order is reflecting that the vacation judge has passed the order without going through and appreciating the entire material brought on record by the rival parties which reflects perversity in the impugned order,” justice Jain wrote.

The high court noted that the lower court firstly expressed its inability to consider the documents running into thousands of pages and later mentioned in the ruling it has dealt with the arguments and contentions. The court also noted that the trial court further did not “sufficiently” and “adequately” deal with federal agency’s contentions on the aspect of recovering the proceeds of crime qua the CM.

Kejriwal has been in custody since March 21, except for a brief period of interim bail granted by the Supreme Court for election campaigning. The case stems from alleged irregularities in Delhi’s now-scrapped 2021-22 excise policy.

The AAP leader’s legal team, led by senior advocates Abhishek Singhvi and Vikram Chaudhary, argued that the lower court had suggested that the judge dealt with all arguments and contentions. The HC said that portion of the ruling did not “inspire any confidence” that the judge had taken into account “entire material brought on record” against Kejriwal.

The lower court, while ruling in favour of Kejriwal, had held that there was a lack of direct evidence implicating the CM and a potential bias in the ED’s approach, listing out what it said were several missing aspects in its contention.

The HC took a strong view of the lower court order. “The observation made by the vacation judge is uncalled for, unwarranted and out of context. The vacation judge should refrain from making such observations in the order. The vacation judge was required to consider every important and relevant document at time of passing of order.”

Kejriwal’s legal team has challenged in the Supreme Court the HC’s interim stay ordered on Friday, which prevented his release following the lower court’s bail decision. On Tuesday, AAP leaders said they disagreed with the HC ruling and will now challenge that too. “I think the high court bench was prejudiced. We will approach the higher court. Our legal team will decide the strategy and the time when we approach the higher court,” said party leader Saurabh Bharadwaj.

Additional solicitor general SV Raju, representing the ED, argued that the trial court failed to consider the stringent condition required under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for granting bail: the trial court, under Section 45 of the law, must come to a prima facie conclusion that Kejriwal was not guilty of the offence alleged.

The high court also said the ED should have been given “adequate opportunity to advance arguments on bail application by the vacation judge”, and flagged the lower court’s apparent silence in dealing with the requirements of section 45 of the PMLA. This “The trial court should have at least recorded its satisfaction about fulfilment of twin conditions of section 45 of PMLA before passing the impugned order”, the HC order added.

Singhvi had rebutted the prosecution’s contention that it did not get enough time to argue in the trial court and said that Kejriwal did not misuse the interim bail granted to his client by the Supreme Court, which, he pointed out, took into account all objections and contentions raised by the federal agency. Justice Jain said that “at this stage” it could not be said that Kejriwal’s arrest and remand was not in accordance with law and his personal liberty was curtailed without following the procedure established by law.

The HC noted that the interim bail by the Supreme Court was on merits but against the backdrop of the 18th Lok Sabha general elections.

The case against the CM stems from allegations of irregularities in Delhi’s now-scrapped excise policy of 2021-22, which the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) began probing following a recommendation by Delhi’s lieutenant governor in July 2022.

Late on Tuesday, AAP leaders said that the second federal agency, CBI, was planning to arrest the CM. “At a time when there is a cent per cent possibility that Arvind Kejriwal will get bail from the Supreme Court, sources have informed me that the Centre is conspiring to register a fake CBI case against the Delhi CM and get him arrested by the CBI. The entire nation can see this and is standing in solidarity with Arvind Kejriwal,” said AAP Rajya Sabha member Sanjay Singh.