ED opposes interim bail for Arvind Kejriwal amid election campaigning
In a high-profile case that has drawn significant attention, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed an affidavit opposing the interim bail for Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, set to be decided by the Supreme Court this Friday. Kejriwal, arrested on March 21 in a liquor policy case, seeks to participate in the ongoing Lok Sabha elections. However, the ED has argued that laws are equal for all and that campaigning is not a fundamental, constitutional, or legal right.
Supreme Court’s Deliberations on the Bail Plea
During the hearing on Tuesday, the Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta noted that Kejriwal, as the elected chief minister, is not a habitual offender and pointed out the extraordinary circumstances of the elections. Despite this, the ED in its affidavit warned that granting bail could set a precedent allowing any politician facing charges to seek similar relief under the guise of election campaigning.
Arguments Against Campaigning as a Basis for Bail
The ED’s affidavit highlights that no political leader has historically been granted bail solely for campaign purposes. It argues that if Kejriwal is granted bail for such reasons, it could open the door for other politicians to evade judicial scrutiny by claiming the need to campaign. The affidavit states, “All unscrupulous politicians could commit crimes and then evade investigation citing campaigning for one election or the other.”
ED’s Concerns Over Investigation Delays
The Supreme Court also questioned the ED on the delay in acting against the chief minister, hinting at concerns over the efficiency of the investigation which took two years to reach this stage. The court inquired about the expected start of the trial, emphasizing the need for timely justice.
Campaigning Not a Recognized Right for Bail
Reiterating its stance, the ED emphasized that the right to campaign does not constitute a fundamental, constitutional, or legal right. This assertion was made in the context of previous court statements during the bail plea of Manish Sisodia, a co-accused, where it was affirmed that laws apply equally to all.
The case against Arvind Kejriwal and the subsequent bail hearings illustrate a critical intersection of law, politics, and the responsibilities of public officials. The Supreme Court’s decision will not only impact the immediate political landscape but also set a legal precedent concerning the balance between electoral duties and accountability.