The Enforcement Directorate (ED) informed the Supreme Court on Wednesday that the trial court judge rushed through proceedings and failed to provide the prosecutor with an opportunity to oppose Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s bail case connected to the alleged excise scam. The federal agency criticized the trial court’s June 20 order granting bail to Kejriwal, labeling it “perverse” due to non-compliance with the mandatory conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
A vacation bench comprising Justice Manoj Misra and Justice SVN Bhatti noted the ED’s affidavit, which was filed in response to Arvind Kejriwal’s bail case challenging the interim stay on his bail granted by the Delhi High Court on June 21.
In its affidavit, the ED highlighted that Section 45 of the PMLA mandates two conditions: the public prosecutor must be given an opportunity to oppose the bail, and if opposed, the court must be convinced that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and will not commit any offense while on bail. The ED argued that the trial court judge hurried the process and did not allow the Additional Solicitor General sufficient time to oppose the bail.
Arvind Kejriwal was arrested by the ED on March 21 and received regular bail from the trial court on June 20. The trial court’s decision was based on initial investigations that did not establish Kejriwal’s guilt, and the ED’s failure to provide a direct link between Kejriwal and the alleged money trail. However, the Delhi High Court stayed the bail order on Tuesday, stating that the lower court did not “appropriately appreciate” the evidence presented by the ED.
The ED is now seeking to have the trial court’s June 20 order overturned, emphasizing the procedural lapses and the need for strict adherence to legal prerequisites in such significant cases.
