Delhi HC reserves order on Kejriwal’s plea seeking two additional legal meetings with counsels

New Delhi [India], July 18 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Thursday reserved order on Arvind Kejriwal’s plea seeking two additional legal meetings with his lawyers through video conferencing from jail. His plea was opposed by the counsel for jail authorities and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna reserved order on the plea after hearing submissions of counsels for the parties. Senior advocate Ramesh Gupta appeared for Arvind Kejriwal.

Jail Authorities have already filed a reply to the plea. He submitted that the jail rule does not permit additional meetings. Changing the format of the meeting from physical to video conferencing does not make any difference.

Advocate Zoheb Hossain, who appeared for the Enforcement Directorate (ED), submitted that the application is not maintainable as it has become infructuous because the accused is no longer in the ED’s custody after getting interim bail from the Supreme Court.

However, Kejriwal is in judicial custody in a CBI case linked to Delhi Excise policy. ED’s counsel also submitted that all accused are given equal treatment in jail. Everyone has been granted only two legal meetings.

On the other hand, Senior advocate Ramesh Gupta opposed the submissions and contended that there is no harm in giving him two additional legal meetings. He also submitted that ED did not oppose the facility granted to the other accused.

Senior advocate Ramesh Gupta appeared for Arvind Kejriwal and submitted that the applicant is seeking additional legal meetings with his counsel. There is nothing wrong with it.

The Rouse Avenue Court on July 1 denied Kejriwal two additional meetings with his lawyers through video conferencing (VC) from Tihar Jail.

Special judge Kaveri Baweja dismissed the application moved on behalf of Arvind Kejriwal.

He had moved an application seeking directions to the Jail Authorities for granting two additional meetings with his lawyers through VC.

The special judge said, ” Learned counsel for the applicant has failed to convince the court as to how the applicant is entitled to two additional legal meetings through VC on the same grounds which have been discussed and dealt with in the earlier order. There appears to be no reason whatsoever to take a different view on the basis of the contents of the application under consideration.”

It is also said that it is not in dispute that a similar application filed by the applicant seeking the same relief of additional legal meetings with his lawyers was dismissed by this court vide a detailed order of April 10, 2024.

The Court observed, “The application under consideration discloses no new/fresh ground to take a view different from the earlier order dated 10.04.2024. The order dated 22.02.2024 and relief granted to co-accused Sanjay Singh have already been discussed and differentiated in order dated 10.04.2024.”

“Thus, having considered the submissions made and the observations already made in the order of 10.04.2024, I see no reason whatsoever to allow the application under consideration. The application is accordingly dismissed,” the court ordered on July 1.

It was submitted that Kejriwal is facing about 30 litigations throughout the country and requires two additional meetings with his lawyers through VC to discuss the cases and claim his right to a fair trial.

The counsel for Kejriwal also submitted that, after filing this application, the applicant has been arrested in one more case by the CBI. Further, co-accused Sanjay Singh was allowed additional legal meetings by an order of February 22, 2024.