The Enforcement Directorate and Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal were at loggerheads in the Delhi High Court on Friday as the government agency challenged the bail granted to the Aam Aadmi Party chief by a trial court on Thursday. While ED called the trial court’s order “perverse”, Kejriwal called the ED “completely partisan”, adding that the probe agency was doing a “paper encounter”.
The ED on Friday came out all guns blazing in the Delhi High Court against the trial court’s order. The ED called the Delhi trial court’s order “perverse” and “one sided”.
The ED alleged that the trial court did not go into the material and evidence provided by the agency in the case and denied it an adequate opportunity to oppose the bail. “ED was deprive of the proper opportunity. The judge hurried the hearing when we were arguing,” said Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju in court.
“Kindly have the look at the trial court order. The court does not hear us, does not look at the documents given by us and says it is voluminous. Court says bulky documents have been filed. There can’t be any more perverse order than this,” he added.
ASG Raju said that the trial court’s decision to grant bail to Kejriwal was based on “wrong facts.” “With wrong facts and wrong dates you come to conclusion that it is mala fide. Why is it mala fide? It is missing,” Raju said pointing out that the trial court order mentioned that the ECIR from August 22, 2022, but the ECIR was registered in July 2022.
While arguing in the High Court, ASG Raju called the order “lopsided” and said, “What kind of an order is this? There is direct evidence. The person says Kejriwal said give me Rs 100 crore. This is proceeds of crime. We have given all the evidence. There is corroboration in the form of visitor’s register. I will show how perverse and lopsided the order is.”
Arguing that Kejriwal cannot be given bail just because he is the Chief Minister of Delhi, Raju said, “Holding a constitutional chair is a ground for bail? That means every minister will be granted bail. You are a CM so you will be granted bail? Unheard of! There cannot be anything more perverse than this.”
“Our case is that Kejriwal is guilty of money laundering on two counts. One is in his individual capacity where he personally demanded ₹100 crore. Secondly, he is vicariously liable because AAP is guilty of the offence of money laundering. Why? Because AAP used the money generated from proceeds of crime and used it in election campaign for their candidates and their events,” Raju said.
Calling the order “silent”, Raju said, “The order says ED is silent. ED is not silent, the order is silent. ED was shouting at the rooftops.”
ASG Raju also lashed out at the trial court for ignoring the entire trail of evidence that the ED has gathered. “We have chats to show intimacy between Vinod Chauhan and Kejriwal. Chauhan sent ₹25 crore of the ₹100 crore proceeds of crime to one Sagar Patel. We have chats between AAP people and these Angadias who were dealing with huge amounts of cash.. There are telephone calls. All this has been glossed over by the trial court,” Raju said.
Kejriwal’s Counter
Countering the ED’s arguments, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, called the ED “partisan”. “There is misconception about what a bail hearing should be like. Must mean that judge must write an essay. Just because there is a political antagonism involved and that if all the commas etc are not dealt with by the judge, it gives Mr Raju right to malign the judge. This is deplorable, sad. it should never have come from a govt authority. The ED is completely partisan. There is complete partisanship in every argument, every submission,” Singhvi said.
“There is no perversity. I may write differently, you may write differently, this is not perversity. I may even write wrongly but that is not perversity,” Singhvi argued.
“The law is clear that a grant of bail as opposed to cancellation has two very distinct things. He makes a gigantic admission against himself. He admits that he knows the law. He says the order is perverse and therefore limits to one small aspect. Like Alice in Wonderland, ED has its own understanding of perversity,” he added.
“At the worst if the stay application is denied today and tomorrow the same is allowed. What will be the problem? The problem is for ED, Article 21 is non existent. The liberty of a person is very very low in the eyes of the ED, if it exists at all,” Singhvi said while arguing against Raju.
Lashing out at the ED further, with instances of how people were granted bail on opposing Kejriwal, Singhvi said, “If my lords goes against me, I lose, and I am in jail. ED is a sacred cow that says how can anyone get bail under my nose,” adding that the ED was doing a “paper-encounter.”
Comments
0 comment