June 21st 2024.
In a courtroom in New Delhi, the Delhi High Court was busy hearing a plea from the Enforcement Directorate on Friday. The plea was regarding Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's release on bail, which the ED was seeking to stay. Just the day before, a Delhi court had granted bail to the Chief Minister in a money laundering case related to the now-defunct excise policy. However, the high court had put a hold on the order until it could make its own decision on the ED's plea. This meant that CM Kejriwal would have to remain in judicial custody for the time being.
The high court stated that it would take two to three days to pass its final order on the matter. This came after the ED had requested a 48-hour delay in signing the bail bond after the lower court's decision. Unfortunately for the ED, the trial court had firmly denied their plea for a stay. Not wanting to give up, the ED immediately approached the High Court on Friday to challenge the lower court's bail order. The case was urgently brought before a vacation bench consisting of Justices Sudhir Kumar Jain and Ravinder Dudeja, with Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju representing the ED.
ASG Raju argued that he was seeking an urgent stay on the bail order as it had been pronounced the previous day at 8 p.m. and had not yet been uploaded. He also claimed that the ED had not been given a proper opportunity to oppose the bail, which is why he was requesting a stay. "I am moving for an urgent stay. The order was pronounced yesterday at 8 p.m. The order is not uploaded. We were not given a clear opportunity to oppose bail," he stated. He further added that their plea for a stay on the bail order had not even been considered, and he was demanding that the order be stayed and the matter be heard as soon as possible. "We were denied the full opportunity to argue the case. I am making allegations with full seriousness," he emphasized.
On the other side, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing CM Kejriwal, opposed the request for a stay, citing legal precedents. "There are ten Supreme Court judgments that cancellation of bail is radically different from grant of bail," he argued. After hearing arguments from both sides, the High Court directed that the bail order should not be enforced until the matter is heard in full. "The bail order will not be given effect. We have not passed the final order. You may argue as much as you can," the Bench stated, effectively halting CM Kejriwal's release. It remained to be seen what the final decision of the court would be and whether the Chief Minister would be granted bail or not.
[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
[Generative AI is experimental.]
