+

ED's 10 Points Against Arvind Kejriwal's Bail Order In High Court

The Enforcement Directorate criticized the Delhi court’s decision to grant bail to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the excise policy case, describing the order as ‘perverse’. SV Raju, additional solicitor general, argued in the high court that the ED was not given a full opportunity to oppose the AAP convenor’s bail. Here are 10 things […]

ED's 10 Points Against Arvind Kejriwal's Bail Order In High Court
ED's 10 Points Against Arvind Kejriwal's Bail Order In High Court

The Enforcement Directorate criticized the Delhi court’s decision to grant bail to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the excise policy case, describing the order as ‘perverse’. SV Raju, additional solicitor general, argued in the high court that the ED was not given a full opportunity to oppose the AAP convenor’s bail.

Here are 10 things the ED counsel said in the high court:-

1. “When the turn of my friend came, he said I will be brief. He never touched anything & glossed over everything in a cursory manner. When I argued, I was told 15 minutes, but I said that I would need 1/2 hours & it has been mentioned by Bar & Bench that my arguments were curtailed,” Raju said in the high court.

2. Further, Raju alleged that the trial court decided without hearing the ED and considering the documents presented by the agency saying that the same is bulky. “There can’t be a more perverse order than this,” the ASG said before the high court vacation bench of Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain.

3. He added, “Matter has been decided without considering the documents. Without considering the documents, how can you come to the finding that they are relevant or irrelevant? Without perusing the documents, you say that they are “irrelevant.” Even this is perverse.”

4. The ASG alleged that “he was not heard” and his arguments were truncated.

5. While challenging the city court order, ASG Raju argued that the trial court wrongly concluded that the ED’s conduct was ‘malafide’ based on incorrect dates. He noted that the trial court claimed the material was available in July 2022, but the ED registered the ECIR in August 2022.

6. The ED counsel mentioned that Kejriwal was summoned in October 2023, contrary to the trial court’s mention of August 2023. Raju added that the Supreme Court hasn’t halted the high court’s April 9 order validating Kejriwal’s arrest.

7. The ED counsel argued during the hearing that the trial court granted bail without considering relevant facts, deeming the order ‘totally perverse’.

8. Raju said, “Bribe givers have said that he (Kejriwal) had demanded 100 crore, but it was not considered.” When the hearing resumed, he said that the trial court’s observation that ED has failed to give any direct evidence against the applicant in respect of the proceeds of crime is “a wrong statement.”

The ASG added, “This is a wrong statement. ED presented Magunta Reddy’s statement that 100 crore was demanded from the South Group.”

9. Raju argued that the ED has all the statements to show that Kejriwal demanded 100 crore. He added that the trial court order is “perverse” “one-sided” and “lopsided”.

10. Raju argued in court that Benjamin Franklin’s famous saying, “It is better that 100 guilty persons should escape than an innocent person should suffer,” applies to trials, not bail hearings.

Tags:

Arvind Kejriwal's Bail OrderED's 10 PointsTDGThe Daily Guardian