Your Page Title

Supreme Court gave special exemption to Kejriwal? Sibal spoke on Shah’s statement, but hid the real thing.


New Delhi: Kapil Sibal questioned Union Minister Amit Shah’s legal understanding when he termed the Supreme Court’s decision on Arvind Kejriwal’s interim bail as ‘special dispensation’. Rajya Sabha MP and renowned lawyer Sibal said that Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s remarks are objectionable. He said that if the Home Minister was aware of the law, he would not have made such comments. Addressing reporters, Sibal said, ‘Amit Shah has given a very objectionable statement and has questioned the intentions of the Supreme Court. He said that many people say that the interim bail of Arvind Kejriwal is a special exemption given by the Supreme Court. ‘People say,’ he said very cleverly. You made this statement because you trust those people. Don’t hide behind ‘people say’. The Home Minister does not know much about the law, hence he should not have made such comments.

Know Sibal’s objection to Shah’s statement

Sibal said, ‘Today I will explain to them that if someone is sentenced for more than 2-3 years and if his sentence is stayed, then he can file nomination and contest elections. If a charge sheet is being filed against someone, he can campaign and also file nomination. If charge sheet has been filed against Brij Bhushan then why is he campaigning for his son? Why can’t the person against whom allegations are made campaign? I believe that the Home Minister does not have that much knowledge of the law. If he had known about this, he would not have made such statements.

What did Shah say on Kejriwal being granted interim bail?

In fact, Amit Shah told news agency ANI, ‘The Supreme Court has the right to interpret the law. I believe this is not a routine decision. Many people in this country believe that special exemptions have been given. Sibal, while reacting to this, cleverly ignored the original objections. Sibal did not explain that if his arguments are good for Kejriwal then why do they not fit former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren? The court granted interim bail to Kejriwal but has yet asked ED to file an affidavit on Soren. Sibal has maintained silence in this matter. The important question is that Sibal is a lawyer, he also claims that he understands the law, then why should he avoid answering these questions?

Sibal should answer these questions

Then the question is whether the Supreme Court’s decision cannot be commented on? Supreme Court Chief Justice DY Chandrachud himself said a day ago that the judge should also give an explanation. “As a judge, we are neither a prince nor a sovereign who needs no explanation,” he said at the J20 Summit, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. He added, ‘Judges are ultimately perhaps just public functionaries who sit on a high platform, punish for contempt, and think critically about the lives of others in separate private chambers without fear of electoral loss. Let’s take a decision.

Special treatment was given… Amit Shah said on Arvind Kejriwal getting interim bail from Supreme Court

Stayed in jail for 50 days, Kejriwal released for 21 days

Keep in mind that on May 10, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal in the alleged money laundering case related to Delhi’s excise policy. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had arrested Kejriwal on March 21. After that the Delhi CM spent more than 50 days in Tihar jail. As per the court order, the bail is applicable till June 1 and Kejriwal will have to surrender before the jail authorities on June 2. The Chief Minister of Delhi can participate in the election campaign, but cannot go to office as Chief Minister.

(With inputs from news agency ANI)

Share on:

Leave a Comment