The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgment on the bail petition of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) over alleged involvement in the Delhi Excise Policy scam case.
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan reserved its verdict after hearing both Kejriwal and CBI at length.
The two parties were at loggerheads today over whether the bail matter should be first heard by the trial court.
Contrary to the usual course of first moving the trial court, Kejriwal had directly approached the Delhi High Court for bail.
The High Court dismissed his petition, after which the national convenor of the Aam Admi Party (AAP) moved the Apex Court.
Appearing for CBI, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju today contended that Kejriwal approached the High Court without going to the sessions court. the matter should have been first by the trial court. The High Court was made to see merits, which could only happen in exceptional cases. In ordinary cases, a sessions court has to be approached first.
Moving the High Court first could be allowed only in exceptional circumstances and one exceptional circumstance in this case was Kejriwal being the Chief Minister of Delhi, he added.
Representing Kejriwal, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi contended that the grounds raised in the present plea as regards the mandate on the police department to issue a notice to the accused under Section 41A CrPC were argued before the trial court during remand and rejected.
Singhvi said it would not be fair to send Kejriwal back to the trial court to argue the same issue again. Noting that there has been a huge delay since the case has been heard on merits, the Senior Advocate said it was a clear error on the face of it. He further said that he would not use the word perverse but it was a serious error.
The Senior Counsel highlighted the ruling in Manish Sisodia’s case, in which the top court of the country had observed during the grant of bail that it would be unfair to send Sisodia back to the trial court for bail since it would amount to playing a game of snakes and ladders.
ASG Raju interjected saying that Sisodia went to trial court once. How many times has Kejriwal approached the trial court? It was not fair to look at one para without facts. It could not be the first instance. There was a hierarchy, he added.
Singhvi responded by saying that they (CBI) wanted the ladder to start all over again. He underlined that Kejriwal satisfied the triple test for bail and the trial in the case was unlikely to conclude anytime soon.
After a lengthy hearing which lasted through the day, the Bench reserved its judgment on two separate pleas filed by Kejriwal – one challenging the legality of his arrest by CBI and the second seeking bail.