Kejriwal using ‘childish’ ways to delay case proceedings: CBI

Key points

• NEW DELHI: The CBI on Monday claimed before the High Court that AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh…
• The judge noted the submission and granted another chance to the respondents, saying the case will be heard on October…
• The central probe agency made the submissions before Justice Manoj Jain during the hearing of an application challenging a trial…
• The bench noted the submission and granted a “final opportunity” to AAP leaders and others to respond to the CBI’s…

NEW DELHI: The CBI on Monday claimed before the High Court that AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak were using “childish” methods to delay the proceedings in the excise policy case.

The central probe agency made the submissions before Justice Manoj Jain during the hearing of an application challenging a trial court discharging the politicians in the case.

The bench noted the submission and granted a “final opportunity” to AAP leaders and others to respond to the CBI’s written plea. The court passed the order after the counsel representing Kejriwal and others sought four weeks’ time to file their replies to the CBI’s plea.

During the hearing, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CBI, submitted that seeking four weeks for filing responses was not fair, pointing out that the court had on July 16 granted the respondent “one final opportunity” to file their replies.

What happened

“They are saying they have got a great order. I am saying it is not worth the paper it is written on… Four weeks is not a fair request. My lord knows it is not fair. This is a childish way to get the matter adjourned,” he stated. Kejriwal’s counsel, senior advocate N Hariharan, opposed the submission, saying that the probe agency’s written submissions ran into 103 pages and numerous additional grounds were raised in it. 

The judge noted the submission and granted another chance to the respondents, saying the case will be heard on October 5 and October 6, and “no further adjournments will be granted”. The judge directed them to file their replies in four weeks. 

The trial court had discharged Kejriwal and 22 others in the liquor-policy case, observing that the judicial task was not to secure a convenient outcome or to endorse a dominant narrative, but to uphold the rule of law.

According to The court had, a procedure permitting prolonged or indefinite incarceration based on a provisional allegation risked “degenerating into a punitive process” and raised a “concern of constitutional significance”, where individual liberty was “imperilled” by invoking Prevention of Capital Laundering Act.

The details

The High Court has held that when the attributes of famous personalities are used “unauthorisedly”, it leads to not only commercial detriment but additionally impacts their right to privacy and right to live with dignity. The observation was made on online content on actor Khushi Kapoor.

FIR over ‘harassment’ of girls refused

A city court has refused to order registration of an FIR over allegations that a group of men harassed girls studying at a tuition centre and later attacked residents, saying “mere omnibus allegations” without any specific incident or victim do not disclose a cognisable offence.