Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal Monday questioned the necessity and timing of his arrest in reference to the excise coverage case by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) after the Mannequin Code of Conduct for the Lok Sabha polls got here into pressure and mentioned the statements and different authorized paperwork relied upon by the company for the motion didn’t implicate him for 18 months previous to the arrest.
“Previous to the date of arrest, the CBI lodged FIR and ED lodged ECIR… All these paperwork and pleadings previous to the date of arrest didn’t join me remotely. Variety of felony legislation paperwork didn’t join me for 18 months previous to this,” Senior Advocate A M Singhvi, showing for Kejriwal, informed a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta.
“You might be arresting somebody in March 2024 after the MCC, after not arresting him… for 18 months. My query to myself is both you need to have imminently new materials, or you need to have one thing which abruptly connects me… or you need to have some foundation which no less than we don’t know,” the senior counsel mentioned.
He added, “You aren’t arresting a hardened felony, a terrorist who has executed one thing yesterday, final week, two weeks earlier than, somebody who will even catch a flight and run away. What’s the imminence… So had been you letting a responsible Chief Minister roam free?”
Singhvi identified that within the 2022 Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case, the SC had, whereas upholding a excessive threshold for bail, mentioned it was doing so because of the enhanced threshold for arrest as effectively. He argued that the arrest needs to be on the premise of fabric in its possession, including that there must be a purpose to imagine, which must be recorded in writing, that any individual has been responsible of an offence. These components had been absent in Kejriwal’s case, he mentioned.
Pointing to the info of the case, he mentioned there is no such thing as a point out of Kejriwal in 10 paperwork and 15 statements. Singhvi added, “… an individual who’s behind bars, who himself has given 10 different statements, his eleventh assertion makes an equivocal factor about me. He will get bail subsequent week. He will get approver standing and a pardon two weeks later. And that one assertion turns into the premise for arresting me. The assertion is from July final yr. And also you arrest me after the code of conduct in March this yr?”
He mentioned that one of many individuals who gave the assertion had joined the “ruling get together”, one other joined the alliance companion of the “ruling get together”, whereas one other “purchased electoral bonds”. Singhvi mentioned, “I’m not speaking politics… These are related circumstances”.
The senior counsel mentioned, “It’s after all caricatured that Dr Singhvi is arguing that the CM has immunity. Who’s arguing immunity? However does the CM have much less rights than a standard accused?”
As Singhvi accused the ED of adopting a pick-and-choose strategy to statements, Justice Khanna mentioned, “What occurs is, let’s overlook about this case, let’s take a standard felony case. An individual is arrested, produced earlier than courtroom, utility is moved by prosecution looking for police custody. They produce case recordsdata and a few grounds are given as to why they require police custody. The courtroom then decides if custody must be given… Paperwork and many others which the courtroom examines at that stage … is principally police diary and paperwork which they’ve been capable of accumulate and courtroom types a prima facie view as a result of investigation remains to be on”.
The decide added, “If you file causes to imagine, there must be goal consideration by the authority involved of each beneficial and unfavorable materials”. Singhvi, nevertheless, mentioned will probably be a cat-and-mouse recreation.
Arguments remained inconclusive and can proceed Tuesday.