Lagatar24 Desk
New Delhi: During a Supreme Court hearing on Thursday regarding Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s bail plea, his lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi made a notable reference to former US President Donald Trump. The argument was made in the context of seeking relief for Kejriwal in the Delhi excise policy case, where the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader faces charges filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Singhvi argued that the prosecution’s intention is to “start all over again,” stressing the importance of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which safeguards the right to life and liberty. He intriguingly mentioned that “Trump” has become a “dangerous word” in today’s political discourse.
“An important principle is that Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution trump Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA)…Trump is a dangerous word nowadays,” Singhvi said in court, referencing Republican candidate Donald Trump, who is currently campaigning for a second term as US President.
Supreme Court Hearing on Kejriwal’s Bail Plea
During the hearing, Singhvi informed the bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan that the CBI did not provide any prior notice to Kejriwal before his arrest and that the trial court had issued an ex-parte arrest order.
He also highlighted that Kejriwal had not been arrested by the CBI for nearly two years in connection with the alleged excise policy scam. However, an “insurance arrest” was made on June 26 after he secured bail in the more stringent money laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Seeking bail for Kejriwal, Singhvi argued that the Delhi Chief Minister is a constitutional functionary and not a flight risk. He reiterated that Kejriwal was not named in the CBI’s First Information Report (FIR) and posed no threat to abscond. Singhvi also noted that the Supreme Court, while granting interim bail in the money laundering case, observed that Kejriwal did not pose a threat to society.
On August 23, the Supreme Court permitted the CBI to file its counter affidavit and allowed Kejriwal two days to submit a rejoinder.
Kejriwal’s Legal Challenge
Kejriwal has filed two separate petitions: one challenging the denial of bail and the other contesting his arrest by the CBI. These petitions are aimed at overturning the Delhi High Court’s August 5 decision, which upheld his arrest.
In its ruling, the Delhi High Court found Kejriwal’s arrest lawful and determined that there was no malice in the CBI’s actions. The court noted that the CBI demonstrated how Kejriwal, as the leader of AAP, could potentially influence witnesses who only felt safe to testify following his arrest.
