- The Supreme Court reserved its order on Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal’s plea challenging his arrest by the ED in the money laundering case linked to liquor scam.
- The court did not pronounce any order today and reserved the verdict. The top court is likely to hear the case on Thursday or next week.
- SG Tushar Mehta said that the RP Act says that the right to vote also gets suspended if you are in judicial custody. “Do not keep leaders in a separate class. Everyone is equal in the eyes of law.
- The ED lawyer said that “no wrong message should be sent from the country’s biggest court” that a Chief Minister can “get a different treatment”.
- Raju said that there is not a single statement exonerating Kejriwal.
- The verdict will not only shape his political destiny but also set a precedent for the treatment of elected officials entangled in legal controversies.
In a riveting legal saga that has captivated the nation’s attention, the Supreme Court finds itself at the epicenter of a contentious battle over the fate of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. As the court reserves its order on Kejriwal’s plea challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a money laundering case linked to a liquor scam, the courtroom drama unfolds with a myriad of arguments and counterarguments:
At the heart of the legal discourse lies the question of interim relief for Kejriwal. The bench grapples with the delicate balance between upholding the rule of law and ensuring the unhindered functioning of the government. While acknowledging the gravity of the charges against Kejriwal, the court expresses concerns about granting him bail while allowing him to continue his official duties, wary of potential conflicts of interest.
The Solicitor General, representing the ED, staunchly defends the principle of equality before the law. He argues that Kejriwal’s status as Chief Minister should not shield him from the legal repercussions of his actions, advocating for impartial treatment under the law. The courtroom resonates with the assertion that no individual, regardless of their political stature, is above accountability.
Justice Sanjeev Khanna’s observation that Kejriwal is not a habitual criminal adds a nuanced dimension to the proceedings. However, his caution against sending the wrong message from the apex court underscores the delicate tightrope that the judiciary must walk in delivering justice while maintaining public trust in the legal system.
The ED underscores Kejriwal’s evasion of summons as a pivotal factor leading to his arrest. Highlighting Kejriwal’s failure to cooperate with the agency earlier, the ED presents a compelling argument for the necessity of his arrest, emphasizing the importance of adherence to legal procedures and accountability.
The debate extends to the broader implications of the case on the treatment of political leaders within the legal framework. The court deliberates on the dangers of creating a precedent that could elevate political leaders to a privileged class, emphasizing the imperative of equal treatment under the law for all citizens.
The prolonged duration of the investigation raises eyebrows in the courtroom, prompting scrutiny of the ED’s handling of the case. Justices seek clarification on the necessity of continuing the probe for two years, underscoring the importance of procedural adherence and the application of relevant legal provisions.
Justice Dipankar Dutta underscores the need for a balanced approach in weighing conflicting evidence and ensuring due process. He emphasizes the gravity of depriving individuals of their liberty and stresses the importance of thorough examination of all facts before arriving at a decision.
As the legal battle unfolds, the Supreme Court’s deliberations hold immense significance, transcending the immediate context of Kejriwal’s case. The verdict will not only shape his political destiny but also set a precedent for the treatment of elected officials entangled in legal controversies. In the hallowed halls of justice, the apex court’s decision will stand as a testament to the principles of integrity, fairness, and equality before the law, reaffirming the bedrock of democracy in India.
(With inputs from agencies)
