New Delhi: The Supreme Court will again hear today Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal 's petition against his arrest in the Delhi Liquor Policy case . While hearing this case on Monday (yesterday), the Supreme Court had questioned the jailed Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal as to why he did not file a bail petition before the trial court. A bench headed by Justice Sanjiv Khanna asked, “Why have you not filed an application for bail till date?”

The arrest itself is illegal: Kejriwal's lawyer

In response, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Kejriwal, had said, "We have not filed a bail plea because the arrest is 'illegal' and the scope of Section 19 (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) is very wide. The arrest itself It's illegal."

Intervening when Additional Solicitor General S.V.Raju, representing the ED, said that Kejriwal did not raise any objection to the subsequent detention, Singhvi replied, "Since the initial arrest was illegal, I (Kejriwal) did not object to the subsequent detention. But no objection was raised."

Furthermore, he argued that the documents including the CBI FIR and the ED's ECIR do not remotely link Kejriwal to the alleged scam. Singhvi had said, "Three supplementary chargesheets have been filed (by the CBI), in which my name is not there." The top court had said, "We will hear it tomorrow."

In a new affidavit filed before the apex court, the AAP supremo has condemned her arrest as politically motivated and argued that it unfairly benefits the ruling party during the ongoing elections. This is a compromise with the principle of 'free and fair elections'.

He described this case as a prime example of the misuse of agencies like ED by the central government to suppress political opponents. He reiterated his stand that the ED action was part of a concerted effort to weaken the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and its leaders.

Kejriwal's petition has no merit: ED

Meanwhile, the counter affidavit filed by the ED Deputy Director said that Kejriwal's plea had no merit and his arrest was necessary due to his "completely non-cooperative attitude".

The affidavit states that despite being summoned nine times, Kejriwal was avoiding questioning by not appearing before the investigating officer and while recording his statement under Section 17 of the PMLA, he was evasive and completely non-cooperative in answering questions. Were avoiding giving. (