Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Sunday approached the Supreme Court against Delhi high court’s stay on trial court’s order granting him bail in ED case linked to alleged liquor policy scam.
The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) said that Kejriwal’s lawyers have appealed for a hearing on Monday morning.
Imposing certain conditions, the trial court had on Thursday granted bail to Kejriwal on a personal bond of ₹1 lakh.
However, on Friday morning, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) approached the Delhi High Court which put an interim stay on a trial court’s order.
“Till the pronouncement of this order, the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed,” a vacation bench of Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain said.
What ED said in HC
– Opposing the bail granted by the trial court, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) said that the trial court did not give them a proper opportunity to be heard and termed the order ‘perverse’.
– The ED also alleged that the trial court did not give them proper time of 2-3 days to file written submissions.
– The ED also claimed that they have traced out 45 crores, yet the judge says no direct evidence. “Direct evidence is in the form of statement. There is corroboration also.”
What trial court judge said
– Granting bail to Kejriwal, Delhi court Special Judge Niyay Bindu held that prima facie Kejriwal’s guilt was yet to be established and said that investigating agency was not acting without bias.
– In the bail order made, the judge quoted Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the US, to say “It is better that 100 guilty persons should escape than an innocent person should suffer”.
– If an accused undergoes the atrocities of the system till his innocence is discovered, he would never be able to conceive that justice has actually been done to him.
– The judge noted that it is also noticeable that the ED is silent about the facts as to how the proceeds of crime have been utilized.
Article source: bawaal.in
