The
Supreme Court on Tuesday said that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) will decide
on the urgent listing of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's plea, seeking a
seven-day extension of his interim bail for medical tests, as the verdict in
the main case is already reserved.
In
a hearing presided over by Justices JK Maheshwari and KV Viswanathan, the
vacation bench declined to list Kejriwal's interim plea independently. Instead,
they inquired of senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing the chief
minister, why the matter wasn't raised last week when Justice Dipankar Datta,
one of the judges from the main bench that granted Kejriwal interim bail, was
part of the vacation bench.
"Why
did you not mention it when Justice Datta was sitting on the vacation bench
last week? Let the Hon'ble CJI take a decision as it raises the issue of propriety...we
will send it to the CJI," the bench said.
Singhvi
explained that the prescription for medical tests was given a day before
yesterday, thus precluding its mention before the vacation bench that included
Justice Datta last week.
"I
don't mind if it is listed before that bench [of Justice Khanna and Justice
Datta], even virtually," Singhvi added.
"Since
the bench of Justices Khanna and Datta, which granted interim bail till June 1
to Kejriwal, have reserved the verdict on the main petition, it would be
appropriate to place his time extension application before the CJI for
appropriate orders," the bench said in its order.
Kejriwal,
in his plea filed on May 26, sought an extension of his interim bail by seven
days to undergo a series of medical tests, including a PET-CT scan, due to
sudden and unexplained weight loss and high ketone levels.
"These
may be symptoms of some serious disease. Max Hospital doctors examined him. He
needs to undergo a PET-CT scan and many other tests. He has sought seven days
to get the investigations done," AAP said.
Earlier,
on May 10, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar
Datta had granted Kejriwal interim bail till June 1 to facilitate his
participation in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. However, the order mandated
Kejriwal, who faces charges related to the Delhi excise policy scam case, to
surrender on June 2, post the election activities.
Senior
Advocate A M Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, had previously appealed for
additional time, citing the imminent election results on June 4. Despite the
plea's urgency, the court declined to extend the interim relief, adhering
strictly to legal protocol.
During
a subsequent hearing on May 16, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing
the Enforcement Directorate (ED), raised objections to Kejriwal's purported
remarks suggesting a correlation between electoral outcomes and his legal fate.
Mehta highlighted Kejriwal's statement, "If you vote for the broom [AAP
election symbol], then I will not have to go to jail," expressing concern
over its implications on judicial integrity.
He
added, "This is a slap on the system. That if you vote for me, then I will
not have to go to jail on the 2nd [of June]. How can that happen?"
Justice
Datta said, "That [returning to jail on June 2] is our order."
Justice Khanna, too, said, "That [he will not have to return to jail] is
an assumption… Our order is very clear."
He
added it is "the direction of the court which should matter."
Amidst
legal exchanges, Singhvi countered Mehta's assertions, hinting at potential
revelations concerning a high-ranking government official without explicitly
naming anyone. "If he [Mehta] is going to file an affidavit, I will file
an affidavit about a top minister of this government," Singhvi said.
The
intricacies of Kejriwal's case drew national attention, with Union Home
Minister Amit Shah remarking on May 15 that the grant of interim bail was not a
routine judgment, hinting at perceived preferential treatment.
In
response, Justice Khanna reiterated the court's commitment to upholding the
rule of law, stating, "As far as our order, it is very clear. We have
fixed the timelines. We have said that on so and so date, he is on bail, on so
and so date, he has to surrender. That is it. Our order is an order of the
court. And that is an order of the apex court. If the rule of law is to be
governed, it will be governed by that."