The year 2024 saw two Chief Ministers – one sitting and the other former – having to face arrest on charges of money laundering. Former Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren was arrested for his role in the alleged illegal sale and purchase in Ranchi of land belonging to the Indian Army. Soren resigned as CM immediately before his arrest on January 31.
Arvind Kejriwal, who continues to be Delhi’s CM, was arrested on March 21, on allegations of corruption in connection with the now-discontinued Delhi Liquor Excise policy. Both these arrests came at the behest of the Enforcement Directorate (ED), the central agency tasked with investigating offences related to money laundering, and violations of foreign exchange laws.
Both Soren and Kejriwal sought interim bail from the Supreme Court to be able to campaign in the ongoing General Elections. Requests for bail or interim protection made by both in respective High Courts – Jharkhand and Delhi – had been turned down. Despite all these parallels between these two arrests, there is also a vital point of divergence – while Kejriwal has been granted interim bail by the Supreme Court, Soren’s incarceration continues.
What Brought About Kejriwal’s Release?
On May 10, a division bench of the Supreme Court ordered Kejriwal’s release on interim bail. This order was passed in an appeal against the orders/judgments passed by the Rouse Avenue Court and Delhi High Court upholding Kejriwal’s arrest. In granting bail to Kejriwal, the ongoing General Elections played heavily on the Court’s mind. This is evident from the Court’s observation to the effect that “General Elections to Lok Sabha is the most significant and an important event this year, as it should be in a national election year.” The Supreme Court also noted that courts take into consideration the peculiarities associated with a person while granting bail, and to ignore the same would be iniquitous. To that end, the Court noted that Kejriwal’s situation is not comparable “with the harvesting of crops or plea to look after business affairs.”
Given that he is the CM of Delhi and the leader of the Aam Aadmi Party (which is also part of the Indian National Development Inclusive Alliance or I.N.D.I.A.), coupled with the background of the General Elections, Kejriwal was directed to be released on interim bail. While arriving at this conclusion, the Supreme Court also noted that Kejriwal does not have any criminal antecedents and that the legality of his arrest was itself under challenge. Kejriwal has been released on bail till June 1, and is expected to surrender on 2 June. As part of the conditions subject to which he has been granted bail, he can neither visit the Chief Minister’s Office and the Delhi Secretariat nor sign official files. He is also expected to not make any comment regarding his role in this case, interact with any witness, or access any official files connected with the case.
Meanwhile...
Interestingly, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted interim bail to Punjab’s former Forest Minister Sadhu Singh Dharamsot, so that he can campaign in the Lok Sabha elections. Dharamsot was arrested in January 2024 in connection with alleged financial irregularities in Punjab’s Forest Department. Needless to say, in Dharamsot’s case the High Court has relied on the Supreme Court’s order granting interim bail to Kejriwal.
What Precluded Soren’s Release?
Simply put, there is no straight answer! Three constituencies in Jharkhand will go to polls on May 20, during the fifth phase of the Lok Sabha elections. In this background, it was argued that the 2 fact situation in Kejriwal’s case and the Supreme Court’s reasoning in his bail order would squarely apply to Soren as well, given his prominence within the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha and the state of Jharkhand.
However, Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, who granted bail to Kejriwal just a couple of days earlier, rejected the same for Soren. While issuing notice to the ED to respond, the bench was intent on listing Soren’s bail plea for May 20. Given that Jharkhand would have already voted by then for the fifth phase, Soren’s counsel insisted and managed to get the case listed for hearing on 17 May. He also fervently cited the delays that occurred in the Jharkhand High Court in hearing and disposing of this case, which finally dismissed Soren’s petition for bail only on May 3. However, none of this passed muster with the Supreme Court.
Essentially, the ability of a politician to be able to participate in an election campaign ensured the release of Kejriwal, but not Soren’s. A key differentiator between these two individuals is that while Kejriwal continues to remain an elected CM, Soren does not. Precisely why the Supreme Court did not grant interim bail to Soren is hard to explain or justify. Why the Supreme Court exercised its discretion to grant liberty to an elected politician in one case and not another – this query might get answered when Soren’s bail plea comes up for hearing on 17 May.
Read More
- The Unfortunate Reality of India's Anti-defection Law
- 'Blatant Attempt to Circumvent...': SC Orders Release of NewsClick Founder Prabir Purkayastha, Calls His Arrest 'Invalid'
- Over 9,600 Children Jailed in Adult Prisons between January 2016 and December 2021: Study
- CJI DY Chandrachud Advocates for Ethical AI Integration in Legal Research
