NEW DELHI: The Enforcement Directorate has objected before the Supreme Court to a public statement by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal that if people vote for 'broom', he will not have to go back to jail, saying it is a slap on the face of the institution.
The court, however, clarified that its May 10 order granting interim bail to Kejriwal is very clear that he has to surrender on June 2.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta said the court's order is clear and it had not made an exception to Kejriwal as it felt he was justified to be released on interim bail.
"Our order is very clear, we have fixed a timeline that on so and so date he is on bail and on the date he has to surrender (on June 2, Kejriwal will have to surrender). That is the order of the apex court. If rule of law is to governed, it will be governed by that," the bench said.
On May 10, the Supreme Court had granted interim bail to Kejriwal, arrested by the ED on March 21 in the liquor policy scam case, for campaign till June 1.
On May 16, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, objected to the statement made by Kejriwal after his release from jail.
Mehta said, "It (the statement) is a slap on the face of the institution. I take exception to it."
Mehta said, Kejriwal, the AAP convenor in his public speech, said, they (people) say that I would have to go back to jail in 20 days. If you vote for broom (AAPs symbol) our party symbol, then I would have not to go back to jail.
"How can that happen if you vote for me then I don't have to go back to jail on June 2," Mehta asked.
"That is his assumption. Our order is clear," the bench shot back.
Senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for Kejriwal, sought to refer to a statement by Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Kejriwal's interim bail.
I did not think he would say this and I will file an affidavit and he was alleging malafide against the governmentI will file an affidavit about the top minister of this government," Singhvi said.
"As far critical analysis or even criticism of the judgment is concerned, you may have different viewpoints; we have no difficulty with that. Our order is very clear," the bench said.
"We specifically said that we are not making an exception to anybody. What we felt was justified, we passed that order, the bench added.
During the hearing, the Enforcement Directorate questioned maintainability of the petition filed by Kejriwal challenging his March 21 arrest and remand in the 2022 liquor policy scam case.
