New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia's bail plea against his arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in Delhi liquor policy case, noting the AAP leader has legal remedies available at his hand.
Presiding over the matter, the bench of Chief Justice of India D.Y Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha noted that the complainant should approach the Delhi High Court, instead of directly approaching the SC under Article 32 of the Constitution. "You are challenging an FIR, challenging remand, seeking bail, all under Article 32. You have remedies before the High Court under Section 482 CrPC", the CJI noted.
Representing Sisodia, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that Article 32 presented constitutional provisions to allow for exceptional situations when applying for bail, referring to cases involving Arnab Goswami and Vinod Dua. The apex court, however, observed that the situation at hand was different as it pertained to a case filed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, whereas the Arnab Goswami case appeared before the top court after hearings conducted by the Delhi High Court and the Vinod Dua scenario was in connection with cases filed against a journalist for publishing critical reports.
"Arnab travelled here from HC case, in Dua's case it was freedom of speech and expression... His views on Covid were curtailed by sedition. That's a very different circumstance, here you have a very different circumstance where you have remedy before the HC" the CJI said. The senior counsel, meanwhile, argued that Sisodia's arrest in the case would be illegal. "The arrest is illegal due to two reasons, one being that the offense is punishable for less than seven years and the accused had complied with all summons. He has appeared for all summons. Where is the flight risk?" Singhvi noted.
Also read: Punjab Governor Vs AAP govt: Assembly summoned on March 3, SG Tushar Mehta tells apex court
"It will set a very wrong precedent. Just because an incident happens in Delhi doesn't mean we are approached. There are some rights which are elevated to this level but this case.... can you not say the same thing to the Delhi HC", the CJI also inquired. Replying to this, Singhvi said that the roster judge of Delhi HC, was not holding sittings owing to his work in the UAPA tribunal in the PFI case. Justice DK Kumar these days has been unavailable and winds up the court early because he has to go for tribunal trials, the Senior Counsel explained.
Unconvinced, the SC however directed the complainant to approach the Delhi HC Chief Justice. "We are not inclined to entertain the petition at this stage" the bench noted. The matter was listed on Tuesday after Singhvi made an urgent mention earlier in the morning.
