+
  • HOME»
  • Delhi Excise Policy Case: Kejriwal withdraws Plea from SC, to file fresh

Delhi Excise Policy Case: Kejriwal withdraws Plea from SC, to file fresh

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Wednesday withdrew his plea challenging the Delhi High Court’s June 21 order, which granted an interim stay on his regular bail in the Delhi excise policy case being investigated by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED). Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, announced plans to file a new petition […]

Delhi High Court Seeks CBI Reply on Kejriwal's Arrest Challenge Within 7 Days
Delhi High Court Seeks CBI Reply on Kejriwal's Arrest Challenge Within 7 Days

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Wednesday withdrew his plea challenging the Delhi High Court’s June 21 order, which granted an interim stay on his regular bail in the Delhi excise policy case being investigated by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED).

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, announced plans to file a new petition challenging the High Court’s June 25 final order that stayed the trial court’s decision to grant regular bail to Kejriwal. A vacation bench of Justices Manoj Misra and SVN Bhatti permitted Kejriwal to withdraw his plea and granted him the liberty to submit a fresh petition.

Singhvi informed the bench that the CBI had also arrested Kejriwal in connection with the case.

On June 21, the High Court had granted an interim stay on bail while reserving its order, responding to a plea from the Enforcement Directorate seeking to prevent Kejriwal’s release. Kejriwal appealed to the Supreme Court against the High Court’s order.

On June 24, the Supreme Court adjourned the matter to June 26, noting that the High Court’s decision to grant an interim stay on bail without a final order was “unusual.”

On June 25, the High Court issued its final order, maintaining the stay on Kejriwal’s release. The High Court criticized the trial court vacation judge’s bail order, citing a lack of thorough review of the ED’s evidence and describing the judge’s observations as “uncalled for, unwarranted and out of context.”

Advertisement