IMPORTANT POINT
Grant of interim bail/release – While examining question of grant of interim bail/release, courts always take into consideration peculiarities associated with person in question and surrounding circumstances – Interim bail is granted in facts of each case.

2. Arvind Kejriwal in this appeal has challenged the order and judgment passed by the trial court and the High Court of Delhi, upholding his arrest by the Directorate of Enforcement¹[For short, ‘DoE’] on 21.03.2024.

3. A number of legal pleas and issues have been raised, including the scope and violation of Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. We have heard learned counsel appearing for both the appellant as well as DoE at some length, albeit hearing is yet to conclude and considered decision will take time.

4. In view of the prolongation of proceedings, in the hearing held on 03.05.2024, we had put the parties to notice, that the Court may examine the question of grant of interim bail/release. Accordingly, we have heard arguments on the said aspect.

5. DoE had registered ECIR No. HIU-II/14/2022 on 22.08.2022 pursuant to registration of the predicate offences by the Central Bureau of Investigation²[For short, ‘CBI’] on 17.08.2022 in RC No. 0032022A0053 under Section 120-B read with Section 447A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. This RC was registered on the complaint dated 20.07.2022 made by the Lieutenant Governor of the Government of NCT of Delhi and on the directions of the competent authority conveyed by Director, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India.

6. The investigation by the DoE resulted in filing of the first prosecution complaint on 26.11.2022. The Special Court took cognisance on 20.12.2022. Thereafter, DoE has filed four supplementary prosecution complaints. CBI has filed a chargesheet, followed by two supplementary chargesheets. However, charges have not been framed.

7. At this stage, it is not possible for us to either conclude the arguments or finally pronounce the judgment. However, there is an intervening factor which has prompted us to consider and pass the present order, namely, 18th Lok Sabha General Elections, which are in progress. As the appeal is pending before us, we do not think it would be proper for us to direct the appellant – Arvind Kejriwal to approach the trial court for interim bail/release. This may not be apt in view of the legal issues and contentions that are under examination and consideration before us.

8. It is no gain saying 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. Between 650-700 million voters out of an electorate of about 970 million will cast their votes to elect the government of this country for the next five years. General Elections supply the vis viva to a democracy.³[See Mohinder Singh Gill and Another v. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and Others, (1978) 1 SCC 405] Given the prodigious importance, we reject the argument raised on behalf of the prosecution that grant of interim bail/release on this account would be giving premium of placing the politicians in a benefic position compared to ordinary citizens of this country. While examining the question of grant of interim bail/release, the courts always take into consideration the peculiarities associated with the person in question and the surrounding circumstances. In fact, to ignore the same would be iniquitous and wrong.

9. We will now refer to some case law on the power to grant interim bail/release, which power is exercised routinely even by the trial courts.

10. In Mukesh Kishanpuria v. State of West Bengal, (2010) 15 SCC 154, this Court has held that the power to grant regular bail includes the power to grant interim bail, particularly in view of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

11. Sunil Fulchand Shah v. Union of India and Others, (2000) 3 SCC 409 observes that parole by way of temporary release can be granted by Government or its functionaries in case of detenus under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. Further, the High Courts and this Court can direct temporary release of a deten