Published on: May 07, 2024 12:36 IST
During the hearing of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea against his arrest in the alleged liquor policy scam, the Supreme Court raised significant questions regarding the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) handling of the case. The court sought clarification from the ED on whether it can selectively pick evidence that points towards guilt or innocence, emphasizing the need to strike a balance between the two aspects.
Supreme Court Questions ED’s Approach in Arvind Kejriwal’s Case, Asks Why Two Years Taken to Act
Justice Dipankar Datta, part of the bench along with Justice Sanjiv Khanna, remarked, “Is this an administrative task? You need to strike a balance between the two. You cannot exclude one aspect. You are depriving a person of their right to life.”
The court also questioned why the ED took two years to act against the “political executive,” referring to Kejriwal and his party. It expressed concern over the delay in initiating proceedings and asked when the trial would start.
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the ED, explained that it takes time to understand and confirm details in such cases. He mentioned that there was not a single statement exonerating Kejriwal in the statements of approvers, countering arguments from Kejriwal’s camp that he had not been named in initial witness records.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi, senior advocate appearing for Kejriwal, highlighted that all evidence on which Kejriwal was arrested is from before 2023, indicating that the material was not recent.
In a previous hearing, the court had indicated that it might consider granting temporary bail to Kejriwal to allow him to campaign for the ongoing Lok Sabha election in Delhi, scheduled for May 25. The court expressed its willingness to hear arguments from both sides regarding the grant of bail, acknowledging the time-consuming nature of the proceedings.