NEW DELHI: Aam Aadmi Party on Thursday expressed concern over the recent stay ordered by the Delhi high court on chief minister Arvind Kejriwal 's bail order . The party questioned the unusual nature of the order and the timing of the stay.
"We are worried. A common man comes with a hope for justice. If an elected chief minister is not getting justice, how can a common man expect justice? We have appealed that this should be looked into," says AAP legal cell head and lawyer Sanjeev Nasiar.
He appeals for a thorough examination of the matter, stressing that lower court orders should be challenged within legal parameters.
"We have appealed that this should be looked into. If a lower court judge has given an order, it should be challenged within legal parameters," Nasiar added.
The Delhi high court on June 25 had put the bail of Kejriwal on hold in response to the plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The bench of Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain stayed the bail order in the alleged money laundering excise scam granted by the trial court on June 20 saying the "trial court did not apply its mind while granting bail to Kejriwal in money laundering case."
The high court also said the trial court failed to appreciate the material placed before it by the ED and the judge ought to have given adequate opportunity to ED while deciding the bail plea.
Earlier, the Supreme Court vacation bench, consisting of Justices Manoj Misra and SVN Bhatti, noted that the high court's decision to grant an interim stay on Kejriwal's bail without issuing a final order was "unusual."
The bench remarked, "In stay matters, judgements are not reserved but passed on the spot. What has happened here is unusual. We will have it (the case before it) the day after."
"We are worried. A common man comes with a hope for justice. If an elected chief minister is not getting justice, how can a common man expect justice? We have appealed that this should be looked into," says AAP legal cell head and lawyer Sanjeev Nasiar.
He appeals for a thorough examination of the matter, stressing that lower court orders should be challenged within legal parameters.
"We have appealed that this should be looked into. If a lower court judge has given an order, it should be challenged within legal parameters," Nasiar added.
The Delhi high court on June 25 had put the bail of Kejriwal on hold in response to the plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The bench of Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain stayed the bail order in the alleged money laundering excise scam granted by the trial court on June 20 saying the "trial court did not apply its mind while granting bail to Kejriwal in money laundering case."
The high court also said the trial court failed to appreciate the material placed before it by the ED and the judge ought to have given adequate opportunity to ED while deciding the bail plea.
Earlier, the Supreme Court vacation bench, consisting of Justices Manoj Misra and SVN Bhatti, noted that the high court's decision to grant an interim stay on Kejriwal's bail without issuing a final order was "unusual."
The bench remarked, "In stay matters, judgements are not reserved but passed on the spot. What has happened here is unusual. We will have it (the case before it) the day after."
