Editor's Pick | SC pulls up CBI, reserves ruling on Kejriwal’s bail

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved judgment on Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s petitions for bail and quashing of arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the excise policy case, shrugging off the Central agency’s pitch that he must first knock on the doors of the trial court. The top court reminded the CBI of a comment made in a recent judgment granting bail to Mr. Kejriwal’s former deputy, Manish Sisodia, in the same liquor policy case. The court, in that judgment, had concluded that asking Mr. Sisodia to go back to the trial court for bail would be like “making him play a game of snakes and ladders”. It had after all taken Mr. Sisodia 17 months and multiple trips up and down the court hierarchy to finally get bail. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, part of the Bench headed by Justice Surya Kant, clarified to the CBI that the ‘snakes-and-ladders’ remark in the August 9 judgment allowing Mr. Sisodia bail was not meant as a “charitable observation” about the prosecution in the excise policy case. In fact, grounds like prolonged incarceration, no possibility of completion of trial in the near future, and “process becoming the punishment” were cited as grounds for grant of bail to Bharat Rashtra Samithi leader K. Kavitha and Mr. Sisodia in the same case. The court further did not take kindly to the CBI claim that bail to Mr. Kejriwal would “demoralise” the Delhi High Court. The High Court, on August 5, upheld his arrest and told him to approach the trial court for bail. Justice Kant asked the probe agency, represented by Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, to not second guess what the top court would do. “Whatever we do in this case, be sure it would not be to the detriment of the institution,” Justice Kant told Mr. Raju. Senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, for Mr. Kejriwal, said his case was “unique”. He had secured bail thrice in the money-laundering case linked to the ‘scam’ — twice from the Supreme Court and once in the trial court. Mr. Singhvi questioned the need for the CBI to arrest the Chief Minister on June 26 when he was already in judicial custody at the time on the money laundering charges. “He was the most captive interrogatee,” the senior advocate said. He said the CBI’s sole justification for arresting a Chief Minister was that he appeared “evasive and non-cooperative” to them when confronted with evidence. “But does he not have a fundamental right against self-incrimination? When they say he was not cooperating, they actually meant he was not declaring himself guilty,” the senior lawyer argued. Mr. Singhvi said the High Court was only required to employ the triple test in Mr. Kejriwal’s case for bail. The Chief Minister was a constitutional functionary and hardly a “flight risk”. Besides, he had been an undertrial for a “sufficiently long time” since his arrest by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) in March. Thirdly, there was no question of tampering as “lakhs of documents” relevant to the case were already filed in court, many in electronic form. Mr. Raju countered that an agency’s power to arrest was part of its power to investigate. He submitted that Mr. Kejriwal was arrested by the CBI on the basis of permission given by the trial court. He said the application made by the CBI for permission to arrest Mr. Kejriwal was never challenged by him. The procedure for his arrest was duly followed. He was given the grounds for his arrest in writing and was represented by a legal counsel. The Supreme Court could intervene only if a constitutional right was violated. Mr. Sisodia and Ms. Kavitha had done the grind of the trial courts before appealing to the Supreme Court for bail. Mr. Kejriwal could not act like a “privileged person”, Mr. Raju said. The Additional Solicitor General said persons linked to the Assembly election in Goa, where the excise policy pay-offs were allegedly laundered, had come forward as witnesses. “If the court gives him (Kejriwal) relief now, they will all turn hostile. At least some time should be given for their statements to be recorded,” he urged. The Supreme Court, while granting relief to Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren’s aide in an illegal mining case, had ruled that bail is the rule and jail an exception even in money-laundering cases. The Hindu’s Editorials ​Maoist setback: On the anti-Naxalite operations this year ​Income inequality: On the ILO’s World Employment and Social Outlook study The Hindu’s Daily Quiz In which city did the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s three-day coordination committee meeting take place? Belagavi Palakkad Visakhapatnam Sangli To know the answer and to play the full quiz, click here. [logo] Editor's Pick 06 September 2024 [The Hindu logo] [EP Logo] Editor's Pick 06 September 2024 In the Editor's Pick newsletter, The Hindu explains why a story was important enough to be carried on the front page of today's edition of our newspaper. [View in browser]( [More newsletters]( SC pulls up CBI, reserves ruling on Kejriwal’s bail [The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved judgment on Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s petitions for bail and quashing of arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the excise policy case]( shrugging off the Central agency’s pitch that he must first knock on the doors of the trial court. The top court reminded the CBI of a comment made in a[recent judgment granting bail to Mr. Kejriwal’s former deputy, Manish Sisodia]( in the same liquor policy case. The court, in that judgment, had concluded that asking Mr. Sisodia to go back to the trial court for bail would be like “making him play a game of snakes and ladders”. It had after all taken Mr. Sisodia 17 months and multiple trips up and down the court hierarchy to finally get bail. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, part of the Bench headed by Justice Surya Kant, clarified to the CBI that the ‘snakes-and-ladders’ remark in the August 9 judgment allowing Mr. Sisodia bail was not meant as a “charitable observation” about the prosecution in the excise policy case. In fact, grounds like prolonged incarceration, no possibility of completion of trial in the near future, and “process becoming the punishment” were cited as grounds for [grant of bail to Bharat Rashtra Samithi leader K. Kavitha]( and Mr. Sisodia in the same case. The court further did not take kindly to the CBI claim that bail to Mr. Kejriwal would “demoralise” the Delhi High Court. The High Court, on August 5, upheld his arrest and told him to approach the trial court for bail. Justice Kant asked the probe agency, represented by Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, to not second guess what the top court would do. “Whatever we do in this case, be sure it would not be to the detriment of the institution,” Justice Kant told Mr. Raju. Senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, for Mr. Kejriwal, said his case was “unique”. He had secured bail thrice in the money-laundering case linked to the ‘scam’ — twice from the Supreme Court and once in the trial court. Mr. Singhvi questioned the need for the CBI to arrest the Chief Minister on June 26 when he was already in judicial custody at the time on the money laundering charges. “He was the most captive interrogatee,” the senior advocate said. He said the CBI’s sole justification for arresting a Chief Minister was that he appeared “evasive and non-cooperative” to them when confronted with evidence. “But does he not have a fundamental right against self-incrimination? When they say he was not cooperating, they actually meant he was not declaring himself guilty,” the senior lawyer argued. Mr. Singhvi said the High Court was only required to employ the triple test in Mr. Kejriwal’s case for bail. The Chief Minister was a constitutional functionary and hardly a “flight risk”. Besides, he had been an undertrial for a “sufficiently long time” since his arrest by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) in March. Thirdly, there was no question of tampering as “lakhs of documents” relevant to the case were already filed in court, many in electronic form. Mr. Raju countered that an agency’s power to arrest was part of its power to investigate. He submitted that Mr. Kejriwal was arrested by the CBI on the basis of permission given by the trial court. He said the application made by the CBI for permission to arrest Mr. Kejriwal was never challenged by him. The procedure for his arrest was duly followed. He was given the grounds for his arrest in writing and was represented by a legal counsel. The Supreme Court could intervene only if a constitutional right was violated. Mr. Sisodia and Ms. Kavitha had done the grind of the trial courts before appealing to the Supreme Court for bail. Mr. Kejriwal could not act like a “privileged person”, Mr. Raju said. The Additional Solicitor General said persons linked to the Assembly election in Goa, where the excise policy pay-offs were allegedly laundered, had come forward as witnesses. “If the court gives him (Kejriwal) relief now, they will all turn hostile. At least some time should be given for their statements to be recorded,” he urged. [The Supreme Court, while granting relief to Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren’s aide in an illegal mining case, had ruled that bail is the rule and jail an exception even in money-laundering cases](. The Hindu’s Editorials [Arrow][​Maoist setback: On the anti-Naxalite operations this year]( [Arrow][​Income inequality: On the ILO’s World Employment and Social Outlook study]( The Hindu’s Daily Quiz In which city did the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s three-day coordination committee meeting take place? - Belagavi - Palakkad - Visakhapatnam - Sangli To know the answer and to play the full quiz, [click here.]( Today’s Best Reads [[Watch: How will the morality law hit Afghan women?] Watch: How will the morality law hit Afghan women?]( [[Willing to get examined at AIIMS, Puja Khedkar tells Delhi High Court] Willing to get examined at AIIMS, Puja Khedkar tells Delhi High Court]( [[China's Xi promises $50 billion for Africa over next three years] China's Xi promises $50 billion for Africa over next three years]( [[Supreme Court pulls up CBI, reserves ruling on Arvind Kejriwal’s bail] Supreme Court pulls up CBI, reserves ruling on Arvind Kejriwal’s bail]( Copyright© 2024, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( Manage your newsletter subscription preferences [here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](