In a significant development, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was granted bail by Special Judge Niyay Bindu of Rouse Avenue Courts yesterday (June 20) evening. The detailed order, which was released today (June 21), has sparked controversy as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) immediately moved the High Court against the bail order.
The lower court’s decision to grant bail has been met with criticism from the ED, which has called the arrest of Kejriwal “mala fide.”
According to the judgment, the court decided not to review the extensive documents submitted by both parties, citing the impracticality of going through thousands of pages at that juncture. Despite this, the court concluded that the ED’s actions were mala fide and issued the bail order around 8 PM yesterday. The order was uploaded today due to time constraints.
The ED, represented by Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, expressed strong objections to the trial court’s process. Raju argued that the court did not consider the ED’s arguments nor the voluminous documents presented, which, in his view, was a fundamental procedural error.
“There can’t be any more perverse order than this,” Raju stated, emphasising the court’s duty to thoroughly review the submitted documents before making a decision.
Further complicating matters, the ED highlighted discrepancies in the court’s understanding of the case. The ASG pointed out that the trial court inaccurately recorded the date of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) as August 22, 2022, instead of the correct date in July 2022. This discrepancy, according to the ED, misled the court’s judgment on the case’s material facts.
Moreover, the ED accused the lower court of disregarding a prior High Court order, which had found merit in Kejriwal’s arrest and remanded him to ED custody followed by jail. The ASG noted that the Supreme Court did not stay the High Court’s order, implying that the lower court should not have ruled in favour of Kejriwal without considering this context.
In response to these arguments, the High Court, comprising Justices Sudhir Kumar Jain and Ravinder Dudeja, expressed surprise at the lower court’s omission to consider the High Court’s earlier detailed judgment. The bench asked pointed questions regarding the trial court’s oversight, highlighting the gravity of ignoring previously established judicial findings.
The High Court’s vacation bench has paused Kejriwal’s release from jail and agreed to an urgent hearing of the ED’s plea against the bail. The bench will resume hearing arguments after the lunch break, continuing to scrutinize the procedural and substantive grounds of the trial court’s decision.
The ED maintains that the trial court’s order is fundamentally flawed due to its failure to review critical documents and hear the ED’s arguments in full. The outcome of this high-stakes legal battle remains to be seen as the High Court deliberates on the ED’s appeal against Kejriwal’s bail.
