Chaudhari: How to argue and what to argue is my prerogative.

ASG: I said it will take at least half an hour. I couldn't argue in detail.

ASG: In the impugned order, the court doesn't hear us. It says records are voluminous. And passes the order. You don't hear us.

ASG: You don't hear me. You don't look at the reply saying it's bulky. There can't be a more perverse order than this.

ASG: Without going through documents filed by both sides, without giving us opportunity the matter is decided. It is the duty of court to pass order in accordance with law. Without going to documents how can you say it's relevant or not relevant?

ASG: If you'd gone to documents you would have known that the ECIR was registered in August. So there was no question of material being available in July.

ASG: On Wrong facts, wrong dates, you come to a conclusion that mala fide. But why, the reason is missing. My note not considered, not allowed to argue.

Note: Chaudhari+ Singhvi is appearing for Kejriwal and ASG Raju for ED

ASG: The arrest was challenged. The remanding court said the arrest was correct. It was challenged before this court. The single judge said nothing wrong with the arrest.

ASG: We pointed out that the SC didn't say that the findings of High Court ought not to be considered. Those were binding findings not stayed by the SC.

ASG: In Sanjay Singh case, SC says uninfluenced by order of the High Court. Please look at that order. That is missing in this case therefore that judgment stands.

ASG: In face of the Delhi High Court order, the trial court could not have decided in his favour.

ASG: Compare the judgment with the findings. This court says no mala fide. She gives a finding on mala fide on same facts. SC has not said that you decide uninfluenced by that judgment.

ASG: Mala fide is demolished by the High Court judgment.

('She' is Judge Niyay Bindu who ordered bail)

ASG: We showed material but nothing considered. There are two ways when bail can be cancelled. If relevant facts are not considered and irrelevant facts considered, that is a ground for cancellation of bail.

ASG: I am not on cogent reasons. I am on irrelevant circumstances considered. Which is a seperate ground for cancellation of bail.

ASG: I am saying look at the soundness of the order. Could have granted bail but not in this manner. Totally perverse order.

Court: You are saying all these points were not considered? You are saying the points which were elaborately dealt with by the HC have not been considered?

ASG: Yes.

Court: We will continue after lunch.

Tejaswi Yadav's PS Pritam Kumar questioned by Bihar EOU over NEET paper Leak

Bihar Deputy CM Vijay Sinha

China will take measures in response to Japanese sanctions against Chinese companies because of Russia - Chinese Foreign Ministry

How Arvind fooled Delhi for 9 years !

https://x.com/NoiseAlerts/status/1804067266956529795

ASG on trial court observation that ED failed to point out direct evidence against Kejriwal:

This is a wrong statement. We read Magunta Reddy statement. You can decide against me but don't say wrong things about me in the order.

ASG: This reply was on record. Judge says bulky, I'll not go through it. Then says ED failed to point out. What kind of order is this? I am shocked.

ASG: There is direct evidence. We also pointed out that this fellow met the CM. And he said that Kejriwal told me give me 100 crores. Proceeds of crime is recognised.

ASG: We have shown all this to show that he had a role in the demand of 100 crores. Yet the judge says no direct evidence. Direct evidence is in the form of statement. There is corroboration also. Now let me show how one sided and perverse the order is.

ASG: Then the judge refers to speech of CJI which I think is not relevant. Then the judge relies on statement of Benjamin Franklin.

This principle applies at stage of trial and not bail.