New Delhi: In a huge relief for Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who has been in jail for 177 days, the Supreme Court on Friday directed that Kejriwal be released on bail in connection with the CBI case in the Delhi Liquor Policy scam.
This order of the Supreme court by a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan comes on the heels of bail granted to Kejirwal in the money laundering case in the alleged Liquor Policy scam in July this year.
Apex court has recorded many reasons for grant of bail to Kejriwal
In its judgement, the court has recorded many reasons for grant of bail to Kejriwal and has emphasised the evolving jurisprudence in the country on grant of bail to persons accused of various offences.
What did the apex court say?
1. The FIR in the case was registered in the case in 2022, there are 17 accused, 224 individuals have been identified as witnesses, and there is extensive documentation, both physical and digital, which suggests that the completion of the trial is unlikely to occur in the immediate future.
2. Continued incarceration for an extended period pending trial would infringe upon established legal principles and right to liberty, traceable to Article 21 of our Constitution.
3. Kejriwal has been granted bail in the ED case arising from the same set of facts. Additionally, several co-accused in both the CBI and ED matters have also been granted bail by the Trial Court, the High Court, and this Court in separate proceedings.
4. Given Kejirwal’s position and his roots in the society, there seems to be no valid reason to entertain the apprehension of his fleeing the country.
A developed jurisprudence of bail is integral to a socially sensitised judicial process: Apex court
Besides, the grant of bail in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the court in its judgment also underlined the bail jurisprudence in the country which has evolved and underscores the principle that bail is the rule and jail an exception. The court has said “issue of bail is one of liberty, justice, public safety and burden of the public treasury, all of which insist that a developed jurisprudence of bail is integral to a socially sensitised judicial process.”
Moreover, the rule and jail and exception principle has been expanded to cases where the legislative policy is against grant of bail, like terror cases also.
