New Delhi, May 10 :
The Supreme Court on Friday granted interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal till June 1 in the Excise policy case.
A bench comprising Justice Sanjive Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta granted interim bail to Kejriwal on the condition that he furnishes a bail bond in the sum of Rs 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent.
The Apex Court directed that Kejriwal shall not visit the Office of the Chief Minister and the Delhi Secretariat and he shall be bound by the statement made on his behalf that he shall not sign official files unless it is required and necessary for obtaining clearance/ approval of the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi.
The Court directed that Kejriwal will not make any comment concerning his role in the present case, and he will not interact with any of the witnesses and/or have access to any official files connected with the case.
“The grant of interim bail will not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case or the criminal appeal which is pending consideration before us,” the court said.
While granting the bail the Apex Court said, “At this stage, it is not possible for us to either conclude the arguments on the plea of Kejriwal challenging his arrest or finally pronounce the judgment.”
“However, there is an intervening factor which has prompted us to consider and pass the present order, namely, 18th Lok Sabha General Elections, which are in progress,” the bench said.
The Bench said, “As the appeal is pending before us, we do not think it would be proper for us to direct the appellant – Arvind Kejriwal to approach the trial court for interim bail/release. This may not be apt because of the legal issues and contentions that are under examination and consideration before us.”
The bench said, “ It is no gain saying that General Elections to Lok Sabha is the most significant and important event this year, as it should be in a national election year.”
“Between 650-700 million voters out of an electorate of about 970 million will cast their votes to elect the government of this country for the next five years. General Elections supply the vis viva to a democracy,” the bench said.
The Court further said, “Given the prodigious importance, we reject the argument raised on behalf of the prosecution that grant of interim bail/release on this account would be giving premium of placing the politicians in a benefice position compared to ordinary citizens of this country.”
The Court said, “While examining the question of grant of interim bail/release, the courts always take into consideration the peculiarities associated with the person in question and the surrounding circumstances. To ignore the same would be iniquitous and wrong.”
The Bench said, “We will now refer to some case law on the power to grant interim bail/release, which power is exercised routinely even by the trial courts.”
The quote cited a judgement In Mukesh Kishanpuria v. State of West Bengal in which the Apex Court had held that the power to grant regular bail includes the power to grant interim bail, particularly given Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Quoting another judgement in Sunil Fulchand Shah v. Union of India and Others in which the Apex Court observed that parole by way of temporary release can be granted by the Government or its functionaries in case of detenus under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974.
The Supreme Court Bench said, “Further, the High Courts and this Court can direct temporary release of a detenu for specified reasons in a judgement – Mohinder Singh Gill and Another v. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and Others, (1978) which said when the request is unjustifiably rejected by the authorities.”
However, the power of temporary release of a detenu suffering preventive detention is exercised only in extreme and deserving cases.
The Apex Court said, “The expression “interim” bail is not defined in the Code. It is an innovation by legal neologism which has gained acceptance and recognition. The terms, “interim” bail/“interim” suspension of sentence, have been used and accepted as part of the legal vocabulary and are well-known expressions.”
The Court said the Power to grant interim bail is commonly exercised in many cases. Interim bail is granted in the facts of each case.
“This case is not an exception,” the bench said.
The bench said, “Prosecution has rightly pointed out that the appellant – Arvind Kejriwal had failed to appear despite nine (9) notices/summons, the first of which was issued in October 2023. This is a negative factor, but there are several other facets which we are required to take into consideration.”
The Court said, “The appellant – Arvind Kejriwal is the Chief Minister of Delhi and a leader of one of the national parties. No doubt, serious accusations have been made, but he has not been convicted. He does not have any criminal antecedents. He is not a threat to the society. The investigation in the present case has remained pending since August 2022.”
The Court further said, “Arvind Kejriwal was arrested, on March 21, 2024. More importantly, the legality and validity of the arrest itself are under challenge before this Court and we are yet to finally pronounce on the same. The fact situation cannot be compared with the harvesting of crops or plea to look after business affairs.”
“In this background, once the matter is subjudice and the questions relating to the legality of arrest are under consideration, a more holistic and libertarian view is justified, in the background that the 18th Lok Sabha General Elections are being held,” the Bench said.
The Apex Court then referred to the judgment on behalf of the DoE: (i) In Anukul Chandra Pradhan v. Union of India and Others in which the Apex Court rejected the constitutional challenge to sub-section (5) to Section 62 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, observing that the right to vote is not a constitutional right and that the right can be curtailed.
The bench said, “Interestingly, the proviso to the said sub-section states that a person subjected to preventive detention can vote. The prohibition was upheld on several grounds, including, that it promotes the object of free and fair elections. Indeed there are decisions of this Court that advert to the importance of elections in democracy, described as the barometer and lifeline of the parliamentary system and its setup.”
The Supreme Court after citing several other judgements finally directed that Arvind Kejriwal will be released on interim bail in connection with a case filed by ED on August 22, 2022, till June 1, 2024, that is, he will surrender on June 2, 2024.
