Delhi High Court on Monday reserved an order on Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's regular bail plea in the CBI case related to the excise policy case.
Senior advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi opposed the CBI's arguments that Kejriwal should move the trial court for bail.
Advocate DP Singh, representing the CBI, informed the court that they had filed a chargesheet against Arvind Kejriwal in the trial court. However, Abhishek Manu Singh argued that merely filing a chargesheet did not entitle Kejriwal to regular bail.
Concluding its probe, the CBI filed its final charge sheet in the case against Kejriwal and others on Monday.
CBI informed the Delhi High Court that as their investigation progressed, they discovered more evidence implicating Arvind Kejriwal. The chargesheet filed today named six individuals, including Kejriwal, but five of them have not been arrested yet, submitting Advocate DP Singh said, reported ANI.
The CBI counsel further submitted that C Aravind, an IAS officer under Manish Sisodia, testified that Vijay Nair brought a copy of the excise policy to be entered into the computer, and Arvind Kejriwal was present at that time. This, according to the CBI, indicated Kejriwal's direct involvement in the matter.
— Arvind Kejriwal has been granted bail thrice in the ED case.
— He pointed out that since Kejriwal's arrest by the CBI, there have been no confrontations or new developments.
— He argued that the distinction between bail and writ petitions did not impact the case's merit.
— There is no direct evidence against Arvind Kejriwal.
— CBI frequently refers to Vijay Nair as a central figure in the case, but Nair was granted bail in the CBI case a long time ago.
— The policy was the result of nine inter-ministerial committees involving officials from various departments and was published in July 2021 after a year of deliberation.
— While Arvind Kejriwal signed the excise policy, so did 15 other people, including the Lieutenant Governor. By the CBI's logic, the Lieutenant Governor and the 50 bureaucrats, including the Chief Secretary, should also be considered co-accused, ANI quoted Singhvi as saying.
However, countering Singhvi, Special Public Prosecutor DP Singh, representing CBI, said that it was not an approval by LG. “All the officers have given statements. They manipulated the entire script,” he said.
— They refer to AAP spending ₹4 crore on publicity. I wonder how much money the ruling party has spent on publicity. I wonder if the CBI will ask them the question. There, the money is not ₹4 crore but ₹4,000 crore. Today, there is no direct evidence, no recovery. There is pure hearsay, reported Bar and Bench, quoting Singhvi.
