The court indicated it may consider granting interim bail to Kejriwal due to the ongoing Lok Sabha elections in Delhi
Digital Desk: The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that Arvind Kejriwal, the incarcerated chief minister of Delhi, will not be permitted to carry out his official duties because it "may have a cascading effect" if he is released on interim bail. But Kejriwal did not receive any instant respite as the Supreme Court postponed deciding his bail application.
"We will give you a date for the day after tomorrow. If it's not possible, we will keep it sometime next week. Next week is going to be very difficult," the bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta commented while hearing the jailed Chief Minister's petition challenging his March 21 arrest by the Enforcement Directorate.
The bench said that if it decides to release the AAP chief, "we are very clear that we don't want you to be performing official duties since it may have a cascading effect."
"We do not want interference at all in the work of the government. It's your wish that you want to continue as Chief Minister. Today, it is not a question of legality but propriety. We are considering the interim bail just because of elections, else we wouldn't have considered it at all."
In his petition, Kejriwal claims his arrest was "motivated" and based on contradictory statements from co-accused who have turned approvers. He is seeking his release and to declare the arrest "illegal."
During the hearing, the Supreme Court questioned the ED's delay in probing Kejriwal and why questions were not asked about him earlier in the investigation. The court also sought details on the increase in alleged proceeds of crime from ₹100 crores to ₹1,100 crores.
The court indicated it may consider granting interim bail to Kejriwal due to the ongoing Lok Sabha elections in Delhi. Still, it emphasised that if released, he should refrain from performing official duties. The ED has objected to granting bail, citing Kejriwal's "uncooperative" behaviour during questioning.
The case involves allegations of a conspiracy in the Delhi excise policy, with claims that it provided high-profit margins to liquor retailers and that a portion of these profits were used to fund the Aam Aadmi Party's election campaigns.
Continue Reading
