Arvind Kejriwal's Bail: Delhi High Court Reserves Order in CBI Liquor Policy Case; Here's What Abhishek Singhvi Argued
The Delhi High Court recently reserved its order on Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s bail plea in a case related to the contentious liquor policy. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has strongly opposed the bail, branding Kejriwal as the "sutradhaar" or mastermind of the alleged scam. Here’s a deep dive into the arguments presented by both sides and the intricacies of the case.
CBI's Stand: Kejriwal as the Mastermind
.jpg)
The CBI, in its supplementary chargesheet, has painted Arvind Kejriwal as the pivotal figure in the liquor policy case. They claim that their investigation led them to compelling evidence implicating the Delhi Chief Minister. Advocate DP Singh, representing the CBI, underscored that Kejriwal's arrest was essential for the investigation’s progress.
According to the CBI, six individuals were named in the chargesheet, including Kejriwal. Interestingly, five of these individuals were not arrested, raising questions about selective targeting. The CBI counsel highlighted that an IAS officer, C Aravind, testified about Vijay Nair, a close associate, bringing the excise policy draft to Kejriwal, indicating his direct involvement.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi's Defense: A Fight Against Hearsay
Senior advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, defending Kejriwal, presented a robust argument against the CBI's claims. Singhvi emphasized that Kejriwal has been granted bail thrice in the related Enforcement Directorate (ED) case, with no new confrontations or developments post-arrest. He argued that the distinction between bail and writ petitions did not undermine the case's merit and stressed the absence of direct evidence against Kejriwal.
Singhvi pointed out that the policy in question was the outcome of deliberations by nine inter-ministerial committees, involving numerous officials, and was published after a year-long process. He questioned the logic of targeting only Kejriwal when 15 others, including the Lieutenant Governor, also signed the policy. By this reasoning, the entire chain of signatories should be implicated, which Singhvi termed as unreasonable.
The Core of Singhvi's Argument: Lack of Direct Evidence
Singhvi vehemently argued that the case against Kejriwal is built on hearsay. He dismissed the CBI's reliance on testimonies and indirect evidence, stating that no direct evidence or recovery has been made from Kejriwal. Singhvi compared the CBI's approach to building a case based on assumptions, highlighting the lack of fairness and level playing field in the prosecution's strategy.
He also brought up the issue of disproportionate publicity expenses cited by the CBI, comparing AAP’s ₹4 crore spending to the ruling party’s ₹4,000 crore, questioning the selective scrutiny.
CBI's Rebuttal: The Argument of Assumptions
The CBI, represented by Advocate DP Singh, countered Singhvi's defense by asserting that the Lieutenant Governor's role was non-approving and that the involved officers had given statements about manipulation. Singh argued that the evidence presented was more than hearsay and included documentary and oral testimonies directly linking Kejriwal to the alleged scam.
The CBI also stressed that the context of the policy's approval during the second Covid-19 lockdown, with alleged conspirators flying in for meetings, indicated a well-orchestrated scam under Kejriwal's leadership.
In Short
- CBI's Stance: Kejriwal is the mastermind behind the liquor policy scam.
- Defense Argument: Arrest and charges are based on hearsay without direct evidence.
- Court's Action: Delhi High Court has reserved its order on Kejriwal's bail plea.
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court's decision on Arvind Kejriwal’s bail plea will be pivotal, potentially impacting the political landscape. The case brings to the fore issues of legal fairness, the burden of proof, and the intricacies of policy-making processes. As both sides await the court’s verdict, the debate over Kejriwal's alleged role in the liquor policy case remains a significant legal and political saga.
Read More: International Friendship Day 2024: Celebrating Bonds Across Borders
FAQs
1. What is the liquor policy case about? The liquor policy case involves allegations of irregularities and corruption in the formulation and implementation of an excise policy by the Delhi government.
2. Why is Arvind Kejriwal implicated in this case? The CBI alleges that Kejriwal, as the Chief Minister, played a central role in orchestrating the policy, which they claim was part of a larger scam.
3. What evidence does the CBI have against Kejriwal? The CBI's evidence includes testimonies and documents suggesting Kejriwal's direct involvement, although the defense argues these are based on hearsay.
4. What are the defense's main arguments? The defense argues there is no direct evidence against Kejriwal, and the policy's approval involved multiple officials, not just Kejriwal.
5. When will the court give its verdict? The Delhi High Court has reserved its order, meaning the decision will be announced at a later date.
