SC registry denies urgent listing of Kejriwal’s plea.
The Supreme Court had on May 10 granted a 21-day interim bail to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. This interim relief was provided amid ongoing legal proceedings, allowing Kejriwal a temporary reprieve. However, a recent development saw the Supreme Court registry refuse an urgent listing of Kejriwal’s plea, indicating procedural challenges in getting the case expedited for immediate attention. This refusal underscores the complexities and procedural hurdles often encountered in high-profile legal cases involving political figures. Despite the interim bail, the refusal for urgent listing may impact the timeline and strategy of Kejriwal’s legal team as they navigate the ongoing judicial process.
New Delhi: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court registry refused an urgent listing of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea seeking an extension of his interim bail by seven days for undergoing specific medical tests. This development comes amid ongoing legal proceedings where Kejriwal, facing charges related to an alleged money laundering case linked to the excise policy ‘scam,’ had been granted interim bail previously.
The Supreme Court registry rejected the application on the grounds that Kejriwal was granted the liberty to move the trial court for regular bail, rendering his plea for an urgent listing not maintainable. This decision underscores the procedural challenges often encountered in high-profile legal cases.
On Tuesday, a vacation bench comprising Justices JK Maheshwari and KV Viswanathan considered submissions from senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing the Chief Minister. The bench noted that the decision regarding the listing of the interim plea could be taken by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) since the judgment in the main matter has been reserved.
This request was based on concerns over his health, specifically citing “sudden and unexplained weight loss coupled with high ketone levels,” which could indicate serious conditions such as kidney issues, cardiac ailments, or even cancer.
In his plea, Kejriwal expressed his intention to surrender before jail authorities on June 9, instead of the originally scheduled date of June 2. This extension was requested to allow time for the necessary medical evaluations and treatments.
The Supreme Court had initially granted Kejriwal 21-day interim bail on May 10 to enable him to campaign for the Lok Sabha elections. This interim relief was granted despite the ongoing investigation into the money laundering case connected to the excise policy scandal, which has been a point of significant controversy and media attention.
The case against Kejriwal is part of a broader investigation into alleged irregularities in the formulation and implementation of Delhi’s excise policy. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) have been probing these allegations, which have implicated several officials and political figures.
Kejriwal’s legal team has argued that the extension of his bail is critical due to the serious nature of his health issues. The plea emphasized the need for comprehensive medical tests to diagnose and address the Chief Minister’s health concerns adequately. However, the Supreme Court registry’s refusal to expedite the listing of this plea highlights the judiciary’s procedural adherence and the complex nature of such high-profile legal battles.
The refusal by the registry means that unless the Chief Justice decides otherwise, Kejriwal’s plea will not be heard on an urgent basis. This situation requires Kejriwal’s legal team to either approach the trial court as directed or await further directions from the Supreme Court regarding the matter’s listing.
This ongoing case continues to capture public and media attention, reflecting broader issues of governance, legal accountability, and the intersection of health concerns with judicial processes in high-stakes political scenarios. Kejriwal’s case is a notable example of how legal and health issues can intertwine, impacting not only the individuals involved but also the broader political and administrative landscape.
As the situation develops, further legal maneuvers and court decisions will likely continue to shape the narrative, influencing both the immediate legal outcomes for Kejriwal and the broader discourse on legal processes, health rights, and political accountability in India.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court registry on Wednesday refused an urgent listing of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea seeking a seven-day extension of his interim bail for medical tests. Previously, the Court had directed that Kejriwal surrender on June 2, one day after the final phase of the seven-phase election concluded.
Kejriwal’s interim bail was granted on May 10 to allow him to campaign for the Lok Sabha elections. The case involves alleged corruption and money laundering in the Delhi government’s now-scrapped 2021-22 excise policy. Kejriwal’s legal team argued the extension was necessary due to his sudden weight loss and high ketone levels, indicating possible severe health issues.