New Delhi: The Delhi High Court today restrained Arvind Kejriwal from going on a day after the Delhi Chief Minister was to be released on bail after an urgent petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) just a few hours before the release of AAP leader from the Tihar jail.
The court stated that unless the probe agency moved its petition, which is likely to take another 2-3 days at least, Mr Kejriwal will have to reside in jail. The high court also issued a notice to Mr. Kejriwal on the ED plea that sought a review of the trial court order of June 20 by which he was granted bail.
“Subject to the order made in terms of this order, the operation of the impugned order shall remain suspended,” a vacation bench comprising Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain observed.
This made the court say that it was going to take 2-3 days to release the order since it looked at all the records.
Earlier today, when Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju appearing for the ED was objecting to the order passed by the trial court to grant bail to Mr Kejriwal, some of these reasons were termed ‘perverse’ and there were glaring procedural lapses. Mr Raju then addressed the bench that comprises Justices Sudhir Kumar Jain and Ravinder Dudeja, ‘The trial court’s order makes no sense whatsoever and the court stated that there was no direct evidence What the court said is wrong.’
There are two ways when bail can be canceled When relevant facts are not considered and the irrelevant facts are considered that is the ground for cancellation of bail He said this look at the order could have granted bail not in this manner perverse order. ”
The Additional Solicitor General said on the ground that the trial court arrived at the decision based on wrong facts. “On wrong facts, wrong dates, you come to a conclusion that mala fide But why the reason is missing My note was not considered not allowed to argue The arrest was challenged The remanding court said the arrest was correct It was challenged before this court The single judge said nothing wrong with the arrest,” he said.
Relying on a leading Supreme Court case of 2014, Mr Raju stressed that there is a need to ensure that the process of granting bail is well substantiated legally, and carried out after a proper consideration of all relevant facts. He said the trial court should not have ignored some key factors, and should not have taken into consideration other extraneous factors.
“The court did not consider our arguments, did not thoroughly review the evidence we submitted, and simply disregarded our concerns without proper consideration,” he continued.
READ: HAMARE BAARAH MOVIE REVIEW: ANNU KAPOOR SHINES IN A CONTROVERSIAL FAMILY DRAMA