Prior to his slated surrender at Tihar Jail on a Sunday, the 2nd of June, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal is seeking an extension of his interim bail from Rouse Avenue Court, citing poor health and pending medical tests.
Advocate N Hariharan representing Kejriwal, along with ASG SV Raju presenting for the Enforcement Directorate, appeared before the court. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, attending the hearing online, emphasized that Kejriwal's public announcement of his surrender date made no reference to waiting for a court order, thus potentially misleading the court.
'Kejriwal misleading the court'
Hariharan contended that the statements made by Kejriwal were unknown to him, emphasizing that he is not a political figure. Mehta stated that Kejriwal is leading the court astray and concealing facts, including his health conditions.
Initiating the debate, ASG Raju stated that the interim bail was solely for election campaigning purposes and that Kejariwal is due to surrender on June 2nd. The Supreme Court had never indicated that Kejriwal could petition for an extension of his interim bail.
'Petition should not be admitted'
Raju further argued that Kejriwal's petition for an extension should not be admitted and should, in fact, be dismissed. As per the regular bail conditions, Kejriwal ought to be in custody; however, he is not presently detained.
ASG Raju highlighted that Kejriwal's interim bail was granted by the Supreme Court to allow him to campaign and that he should not seek an extension from this court.
'Demand for interim bail not worth hearing'
The argument was made that Kejriwal could petition the lower courts for regular bail, but this does not mean he could seek an extension of his interim bail here. His request for a seven-day extension is not worthy of a hearing.
'Kejriwal concealed facts from the court'
According to ASG Raju, even the provision of dual requirements for bail under section 45 of the PMLA applies to interim bail. The court needs to be convinced that there's no case against Kejriwal before granting bail. Kejriwal failed to inform the court in his petition that he had previously filed a petition with the Supreme Court, which was not listed for an immediate hearing by the Registrar General. He concealed this fact from the court.
'Can this court modify the SC's decision'
Raju further inquired whether this court could modify the Supreme Court's ruling, which mandates Kejriwal's surrender in Tihar Jail by June 2nd. To Raju's knowledge, only the Supreme Court has the authority to amend its orders.
'Weight not reduced but increased by 1 kg'
Raju pointed out that when the Supreme Court granted interim bail, there was also an attempt to extend the date, to which the court declined. Kejriwal himself had concealed his intention to surrender on June 2nd from his lawyer. Mehta argued that instead of undergoing medical tests, Kejriwal actively continued his rallies, implying he was not genuinely ill. The claim of a 7 kg weight loss was false; in reality, Kejriwal's weight increased by a kilogram during this period.
