‘Trial court didn’t apply its mind': What Delhi HC said on Arvind Kejriwal's bail

In a major setback to Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, the Delhi high court on Tuesday stayed a trial court’s order granting him bail in a money laundering case linked to the now-scrapped excise policy.

A vacation bench of Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain said that the trial court did not apply its mind while granting bail to Kejriwal.

The court also criticised the lower court's observation that the “voluminous material” presented by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) could not be considered, deeming it "totally unjustified." Follow LIVE updates here.

“Observation by the trial court that voluminous material cannot be considered is totally unjustified, and it shows that the trial court has not applied its mind to the material,” the court said.

Further, the court observed that the trial court should have given the ED a “proper opportunity” to present its case.

Also Read | Kejriwal bail: SC calls Delhi high court's interim stay ‘unusual’

The court also accepted ED's argument that the trial court judge did not deliberate on the twin condition of Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

“This court is of the opinion that Section 45 PMLA has not been properly discussed by the trial court,” it said.

Kejriwal was arrested by the ED in March in connection with the Delhi excise policy case. On May 10, the top court granted him interim bail to participate in the election campaigning and directed him to surrender by June 2.

Following this, on June 20, the trial court granted him regular bail that was stayed by the HC on June 21, even before the bail order was out.

Following the Delhi high court's move to stay the bail, Kejriwal on Saturday moved the Supreme Court against the interim stay.

However, the top court decided to wait for the Delhi high court’s order on his bail, posting the matter to Wednesday.

A vacation bench of Justices Manoj Misra and SVN Bhatti, however, observed the Delhi high court's interim stay was ‘unsual’ and said that stay orders are normally not reserved and pronounced the same day.