SC judges, who granted bail to Sanjay Singh, to hear Kejriwal's plea today

New Delhi: The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Monday Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's plea against a high court order that has upheld his arrest in a money-laundering case stemming from the alleged excise policy scam.

After his arrest, Kejriwal was twice given ED custody by the special court and then judicial custody.

He will be produced to the special court by the ED for further remand in the afternoon as his judicial custody ends today.

According to the cause list uploaded on the apex court's website, a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta will hear on April 15 Kejriwal's petition challenging the Delhi High Court's April 9 order.

Both the judges were part of the bench along with Justice P B Varale, which granted bail to AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh on April 2.

The bench told Additional Solicitor General SV Raju appearing for ED that no money has been recovered from his possession and the Rs 2 crore bribe allegations can be tested in the trial.

To which, Raju said he has taken instructions from the probe agency and it has no objections if Singh is enlarged on bail.

After the High Court rejected Kejriwal’s plea, the Aam Aadmi Party claimed that their supremo would get relief from the apex court just like Singh.

While the bail for Singh was facilitated by the ED itself, the probe agency is unlikely to give any similar concession to Kejriwal.

Recording the statement of Kejriwal’s lawyer Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi terming the statements of Reddy and Raghav (approvers) unreliable, the High Court order said that doubting the grant of pardon to the Approvers amounts to casting aspersions on the Judicial process.

Mentioning the plea before Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud on Wednesday, Singvi said that the High Court judgment was based on an "unrelied document which was suppressed" from him.

It is pertinent to note that the ED provided evidence to the High Court on March 21 after which Kejriwal’s plea for protection from arrest was rejected. Singhvi apparently talked about those documents being suppressed from him.

ED claims that they have established the money trail to prove the proceeds of crime in the Delhi liquor scam.

This is the second time Kejriwal has approached the apex court after his arrest.

He first came to the Supreme Court with a plea challenging the arrest by the Enforcement Directorate on March 22, a day after his arrest.

However, he withdrew his plea hours after the apex court said the petition would be heard during the day.

Kejriwal’s plea in Supreme Court

Kejriwal has described his arrest by the ED ahead of the general election as an "unprecedented assault on the tenets of democracy" and urged the apex court to release him by declaring the case against him as "illegal".

In the appeal filed in the top court, Kejriwal has said his arrest on March 21 after the announcement of the Lok Sabha polls was "obviously motivated by extraneous considerations".

"The intervention of this court is urgently warranted, as over and above the issue of illegal curtailment of liberty, the petitioner's arrest also constitutes an unprecedented assault on the tenets of democracy, free-and-fair elections and federalism, both of which form significant constituents of the basic structure of the Constitution," the plea has said.

The arrest was made solely relying on subsequent, contradictory and highly-belated statements of the co-accused who have now turned approvers, it has said.

Moreover, such statements and material were in possession of the ED for nine months and still the arrest was made illegally days before the general election, Kejriwal has said in his plea.

"The petitioner's arrest bears serious, irreversible ramifications for the future of electoral democracy in India and if he is not released forthwith to participate in the upcoming elections, it will establish a precedence in law for ruling parties to arrest heads of political opposition on flimsy and vexatious charges before elections, thereby eroding the core principles of our Constitution," the plea has said.

Assailing the high court order, it has said the judgment failed to appreciate that statements made before a probe agency are not held to be the gospel truth and can always be doubted by the courts.

"The ED has allowed its process to be used and misused by vested interests as an instrument of oppression to not only invade the liberty of the political opponents in the midst of general elections 2024 of such vested interests but also to tarnish their reputation and self-esteem. Such lawlessness cannot be allowed to be perpetrated under any circumstances," the plea in the top court has said.