Arvind Kejriwal Granted Bail After Six Months: Restrictions Imposed on His Activities

Supreme Court of India granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal after he spent six months in custody related to a high-profile corruption case. This decision comes after a lengthy legal battle and has significant implications for both Kejriwal and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) as they approach upcoming elections.

Kejriwal’s legal troubles began when he was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on March 21, 2024, in connection with a money laundering investigation linked to the now-scrapped Delhi excise policy for 2021-22. This policy was intended to revitalize the liquor trade in Delhi but was later scrapped amid allegations of corruption. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) arrested him again on June 26, while he was still in custody for the ED case. This led to a complex legal situation where Kejriwal was unable to secure his release despite being granted interim bail in the ED case on July 12.

Legal Proceedings and Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail was delivered by a bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan. The court ordered Kejriwal’s release on bail with a bond of ₹10 lakhs. However, the court imposed several strict conditions on his bail. Notably, Kejriwal is prohibited from visiting his office or signing any official documents. He is also barred from making any public comments regarding the case, which is crucial given the ongoing nature of the investigation.

Justice Surya Kant emphasized the importance of personal liberty and stated that prolonged incarceration without trial is unjustifiable. He noted that the legal framework surrounding bail should evolve to reflect the needs of a developed society. The court recognized that the trial process could take a significant amount of time, thereby justifying the need for bail under the current circumstances.

Background of the Case

The allegations against Kejriwal revolve around the excise policy that was intended to modernize the liquor business in Delhi. The policy aimed to replace a sales-volume-based system with a license fee structure, which was expected to enhance consumer experience. However, it was scrapped after the Delhi Lieutenant Governor called for a CBI investigation into alleged irregularities.

Investigators claim that Kejriwal and other AAP leaders left loopholes in the policy in exchange for kickbacks from liquor lobbies. It is alleged that these funds were used to finance AAP’s election campaigns, particularly in Goa. The case has drawn significant media attention and public scrutiny, especially given Kejriwal’s prominent political position.

Conditions Imposed by the Court

The Supreme Court’s bail order comes with several restrictions that highlight the seriousness of the allegations against Kejriwal.

• No Office Access: Kejriwal cannot enter his office or the Delhi Secretariat, effectively limiting his ability to perform his official duties as Chief Minister.
• No Signing of Documents: He is prohibited from signing any official files, which raises questions about the governance of Delhi during this period.
• No Public Comments: The court has barred him from discussing the merits of the case publicly, which could affect his political strategy and public image.
• Presence at Hearings: Kejriwal must attend all hearings related to the case unless exempted, ensuring that he remains involved in the legal proceedings.

Reactions and Implications

The bail decision has elicited mixed reactions from various quarters. Supporters of Kejriwal view this as a victory for justice and a step towards restoring his political career. Critics, however, argue that the conditions imposed are indicative of the serious nature of the charges against him.

The AAP is currently preparing for upcoming elections, and Kejriwal’s legal situation could significantly impact the party’s campaign strategies. The restrictions placed on him may hinder his ability to connect with voters and manage party affairs effectively.