ED Moves Delhi HC Against Arvind Kejriwal's Bail : Live Updates From Hearing

Singhvi refers to impugned order.

Singhvi: The fact that I was not an accused as far as FIR of CBI or ECIR of ED. Second argument was that several of witnesses or co accused, many major ones like Buchi Babu, Magunta Reddy and son...

Singhvi: My learned friend has no case. His so called perversity is imagined new definition of perversity. It is nothing but error and a different view. A different view is not perversity.

Singhvi: In the interim, I am raising a per se argument. How does your lordships find cogent grounds on an interim stay application?

Singhvi: There may be a case that interim case is there because of flight risk. But no argument is made. On June 2 he went back. The problem is for ED, Article 21 is non existent.

Singhvi: Your lordships does not grant stay. Your lordships sends me back to jail after deciding the overwhelming and cogent circumstances.

Singhvi: Every argument of mine is noted in the argument section. What is the miscarriage of justice? He is a CM. He was out on bail for few days. He went back. Does Article 21 and liberty has no weight? You could take a different view, I can take a different view. Third party can take a different view. That is not perversity.

Singhvi: I am on the basic point that bail grant and bail cancellation are two different things.

Singhvi refers to judgements on the issue. 

Singhvi: He says that what ED is arguing is that order is perverse. So he limits himself to one sub aspect. Here, again like Alice in Wonderland, ED has its own meaning of perversity. For them it means error is perversity and unless every argument of ED is repeated verbatim, it is perversity.

Singhvi: Every time it is said that you have not noted, not considered. The judge notes it. Essay is not to be written. That in any event cannot be perversity.

Singhvi: Stay is nothing but a cancellation of bail. The application is styled like Section 439(2). These two words are nothing but cancellation.

Singhvi: He says so because he knows the law well and he wants to get around the law.

Singhvi: It's a complete misunderstanding of the way a trial court judge is to be read.

It is suggested to your lordships that trial court should have done a mini trial without which the order is bad.

Singhvi: It is not saying I am granting bail to you because SC says grant me bail. The SC gives liberty to trial court to grant bail. Express liberty.

Singhvi: Expressly says you can approach for bail. My question is, if Justice Sharma's judgment was final, why this express liberty was given? If illegal arrest proceedings can be mixed with bail as the ED is deliberately doing then why did SC made a distinction that go to bail and we are reserving order.

Singhvi now refers to the impugned order.

Singhvi: What crime did the judge commit if it quoted the SC order.