"Bail Prayers Are Not To Be Unnecessarily Adjourned": Supreme Court Asks Delhi HC To Decide AAP Leader Satyendar Jain's Bail Application

The Supreme Court, today, in a Special Leave Petition filed by Aam Aadmi Party's Leader Satyendar Kumar Jain, urged the Delhi High Court to hear the bail application and remarked that prayer for bail are not to be unnecessarily adjourned. 

A Special Leave Petition was filed against an order passed by the Delhi High Court on May 28, 2024, by which the Court issued notice and listed the bail application on July 9, 2024. 

The Vacation Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice SVN Bhatti ordered, "This petition is against an order of the Delhi High Court adjourning the hearing of the bail application to 09.07.2024...Mr. Singhvi submits that the question of law which would govern the decision of the High Court is engaging the attention of a 3-judge bench of this Court and therefore it is appropriate that this matter is tagged with that matter...We do not find any merit in the submission because the High Court will decide the matter on its own merits and if the Petitioner is aggrieved with the order, he can always challenge the said order before this court...At this stage, Mr. Singhvi submits that...some observation shall be made so that the High Court decides the matter on the date fixed...It goes without saying that bail prayers are not to be unnecessarily adjourned and therefore we hope and trust that the High Court takes its call in the matter when it is listed next. Therefore, the Petition is disposed of."

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi submitted that the High Court should not have adjourned the matter for six weeks, especially in the Bail Applications. He further submitted that there was a substantial point of law arising in the matter.

He submitted, "The main issue is tagging this matter with others...The issue is can you cover up your default bail by filing an incomplete chargesheet and then saying look now we have filed it."

Justice Misra said, "This issue is under consideration before three-judge bench...because three-judge bench will examine the issue, we cannot enter into the merits. So far as your case is concerned let the High Court decide the same."

The issue pending before a three-judge bench of the Apex Court is whether an incomplete chargesheet can be filed by the investigating agency to defeat the right of default bail. 

On March 18, 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition seeking bail and asked him to surrender forthwith. At the outset of the hearing, the Court observed that Jain had to surrender. The Court had also noted that the accused were not cooperating with the trial. However, on medical grounds, the Court further extended the interim relief and adjourned the matter till January. ASG Raju had informed the Bench that there is a consistent pattern of untoward incidents occurring with the AAP leader right before each court hearing. He also pointed out that the CJI had also asked Jain to surrender during the hearing.

On May 26, 2023, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Jain based on medical grounds. The Court carefully reviewed the leader's medical reports and, considering the findings provided conditional interim bail. The conditions included the leader being permitted to undergo treatment at a private hospital.

Satyendar Jain, arrested on May 30 last year by the agency, is accused of having laundered money through four companies allegedly linked to him. The ED had arrested Satyendar Jain in the money laundering case based on a CBI's FIR registered against him in 2017 under the Prevention of Corruption Act. In 2022, the trial court had taken cognizance of the prosecution complaint (charge sheet) filed by the ED against Satyendar Jain, his wife, and eight others, including the four firms, in connection with the money laundering case. 

Cause Title: Satyendar Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement (SLP(Crl.) 8228 of 2024)