In a turn of events on Friday, the Delhi High Court stayed the bail release of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal and hearing of the case continues today.
In its observations, the trial court noted that the ED admitted that the evidence on record was insufficient to proceed against CM Kejriwal, suggesting that the agency was still trying to obtain more evidence.
In its order, the court expressed strong reservations about the credibility of the approvers and criticized the ED's tactics.
The court said: “The argument that 'research is an art' raises concern. "If taken to the logical extreme, it implies that any person could be implicated and detained based on selectively obtained evidence, indicating bias on the part of the investigating agency."
The judge said the ED must act "promptly and fairly" to uphold the principles of natural justice.
The court pointed out several issues: 1. Kejriwal was not named in either the CBI case or the ECIR FIR. 2. The allegations against the Delhi CM emerged only after the statements of certain co-accused. 3. Despite not being summoned by the court, Kejriwal was remanded in judicial custody at the behest of the ED.
Further, the court found no evidence that co-accused Vijay Nair acted on the instructions of CM Kejriwal.
He also questioned the ED's findings regarding Vinod Chauhan's connections and the alleged proceeds of crime, including an unclarified sum of Rs 1 crore and an unsubstantiated amount of Rs 40 crore.
Citing the legal maxim that "justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done", Justice Bindu affirmed the importance of a perception of fairness in judicial proceedings.
The judge stated: "If a defendant endures systemic injustices until he is proven innocent, the sense of justice being done is lost."
Based on the prima facie assessment that CM Kejriwal's guilt remains unproven, the court granted him bail on Thursday.
In its observations, the trial court noted that the ED admitted that the evidence on record was insufficient to proceed against CM Kejriwal, suggesting that the agency was still trying to obtain more evidence.
In its order, the court expressed strong reservations about the credibility of the approvers and criticized the ED's tactics.
The court said: “The argument that 'research is an art' raises concern. "If taken to the logical extreme, it implies that any person could be implicated and detained based on selectively obtained evidence, indicating bias on the part of the investigating agency."
The judge said the ED must act "promptly and fairly" to uphold the principles of natural justice.
The court pointed out several issues: 1. Kejriwal was not named in either the CBI case or the ECIR FIR. 2. The allegations against the Delhi CM emerged only after the statements of certain co-accused. 3. Despite not being summoned by the court, Kejriwal was remanded in judicial custody at the behest of the ED.
Further, the court found no evidence that co-accused Vijay Nair acted on the instructions of CM Kejriwal.
He also questioned the ED's findings regarding Vinod Chauhan's connections and the alleged proceeds of crime, including an unclarified sum of Rs 1 crore and an unsubstantiated amount of Rs 40 crore.
Citing the legal maxim that "justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done", Justice Bindu affirmed the importance of a perception of fairness in judicial proceedings.
The judge stated: "If a defendant endures systemic injustices until he is proven innocent, the sense of justice being done is lost."
Based on the prima facie assessment that CM Kejriwal's guilt remains unproven, the court granted him bail on Thursday.
