Supreme Court Grants Interim Bail to Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal Under Strict Conditions

The Supreme Court of India has granted interim bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, allowing him to participate in the ongoing Lok Sabha election campaigning. However, the relief comes with stringent conditions aimed at ensuring that his presence outside custody does not interfere with the ongoing legal proceedings related to the alleged corruption in Delhi’s excise policy.

Key Details of the Bail Conditions:

1. Financial Surety: Kejriwal must furnish bail bonds worth Rs. 50,000 along with a similar amount from a surety to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent.
2. Restrictions on Office Visits: The Delhi CM is prohibited from visiting the Office of the Chief Minister and the Delhi Secretariat to prevent any potential influence on ongoing administrative processes or interference with evidence.
3. Limitations on Official Activities: He is allowed to sign official files only when necessary for obtaining clearance or approval from the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, ensuring minimal involvement in government affairs.
4. No Comments on the Case: Kejriwal is instructed not to make any public comments regarding his role in the case for which he is being tried, to avoid prejudicing the case or influencing public opinion.
5. Non-interference with Witnesses: He must not interact with any witnesses or access any official files related to the case, to safeguard the integrity of the ongoing investigation and judicial process.

The Supreme Court’s decision to allow Kejriwal interim bail until June 1, with a directive to surrender on June 2, underscores the judiciary’s effort to balance the right to a fair trial with the necessity to maintain the integrity of the electoral process. The court has scheduled further hearings to determine the merits of Kejriwal’s plea against his arrest and has expressed its intent to deliver a judgment before the commencement of the summer vacation on May 20. This decision illustrates the complex interplay between law, politics, and governance, particularly in cases involving high-profile political figures.