In an affidavit filed before the apex court, the ED vehemently opposed Kejriwal’s petition, asserting the equality of law for all citizens and questioning the classification of campaigning as a fundamental, constitutional, or even legal right. The agency, which apprehended the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader on March 21 in connection to the liquor policy case, contended that no precedent exists for granting bail to a political figure for election canvassing, highlighting the potential adverse ramifications of such a move.
During Tuesday’s hearing, the Supreme Court acknowledged Kejriwal’s status as the elected chief minister of Delhi and emphasized his non-recidivist background. Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta underscored the exceptional circumstances surrounding the case, signaling a nuanced approach to the matter.
The ED’s affidavit, submitted on Thursday, referenced the court’s stance during the bail plea of former Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia, emphasizing the uniform application of laws across all citizens and institutions, including governmental bodies.
Central to the ED’s argument is the assertion that the right to campaign lacks the legal sanctity of a fundamental or constitutional right, thereby diminishing its significance as a basis for interim relief. Moreover, the agency contends that granting bail solely for electoral campaigning could open floodgates, compelling the judiciary to extend similar privileges to a plethora of individuals involved in electoral processes throughout the year.
Continuing its line of argument, the ED reiterated concerns raised during previous hearings, cautioning against the establishment of a precedent that would enable “all unscrupulous politicians” to exploit the judicial system under the pretext of electioneering.
The Supreme Court, in earlier proceedings, hinted at the possibility of interim relief but emphasized the necessity of exceptional circumstances warranting such a decision. Furthermore, the bench raised questions regarding the delay in initiating legal proceedings against Kejriwal and the AAP, underscoring the importance of expeditious trials in maintaining the integrity of the justice system.
As the nation awaits the apex court’s ruling, the case of Arvind Kejriwal’s interim bail stands as a testament to the delicate balance between electoral imperatives and the primacy of legal proceedings.
Comments