The Delhi High Court’s stay on bail granted by a trial court in the now-scrapped excise policy scam case is being opposed by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. On Monday, the Supreme Court of India reserved its decision on this request. The Delhi High Court’s decision was expressed interest in being heard by the supreme court, which set June 26 for the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader’s bail application hearing.
After the trial court granted Arvind Kejriwal bail on June 20, the Delhi High Court postponed his release on Friday.
The Delhi High Court had directed the investigation agencies to submit written submissions by June 24; a ruling was anticipated shortly thereafter, the Supreme Court vacation bench noted.
What the Supreme Court stated regarding Delhi High Court’s decision to keep Kejriwal’s bail untouched
-The Delhi High Court’s decision to withhold CM Kejriwal’s bail was deemed “unusual” by the Supreme Court. “Judgments in stay matters are rendered immediately rather than being reserved. “What has transpired here is atypical.
The petitioner may not repeat the mistake if the vacation bench, which consists of Justices Manoj Misra and SVN Bhatti, decides that the High Court erred in giving the stay on the interim order.
“Orders on stay applications were held until the bail-granting lower court order was stayed.” By June 24th, parties have the chance to submit brief submissions. The request for an adjournment is made by the Additional Solicitor General (ASG), who states that the order on the stay application will be passed soon. The court issued an order, saying, “We think it appropriate to list the case the day after and let that be brought on record if High Court passes an order.”
The attorney for CM Kejriwal stated
Arvind Kejriwal’s attorney, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, asked that the bail order’s temporary stay be lifted. Singhvi requested the bench to postpone the high court’s decision till it is finalized, arguing that CM Kejriwal does not present a flight risk.
“I am aware of what I’m asking. Just as the high court had stayed the bail order upon the Enforcement Directorate’s mere mention, this court must stay the high court order before it is pronounced,” he argued.