Congress Rajya Sabha leader & Arvind Kejriwal's counsel Abhishek Singhvi recently explained the 10 arguments that he made in the Delhi High Court after the arrest of Delhi CM. Abhishek Singhvi in an interview with a news portal also explained that he outlined a pattern that was allegedly used by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to frame Arvind Kejriwal in the alleged liquor policy case. Notably, Singhvi stated that among the 10 arguments that he made in the Delhi High Court, one included the timing of Arvind Kejriwal's arrest. Below is what Abhishek Singhvi said-
"Unfortunately High Courts do not do live streaming so you can't see the link subsequently after the arguments are over. I spent almost 45 to 50 minutes arguing. One out of ten arguments were about the timing. It was about basic structure, a level playing field. It was about the case of August 2022 which betrays a complete lack of necessity to arrest on March 24. The third and fourth arguments were about the fact that material records show that nothing that can be done without arrest has happened, including taking him into custody. He is available for everything. One and a half years have passed, and there is no need to arrest. I have cited case laws.
"The most important argument which took place for almost 20 minutes is a very fascinating argument. I took four star witnesses Entire case of ED is based on four names. Butchi Babu, one Reddy father (Magunta Reddy), Raghav Reddy (his son), Arvind, and one more chap (Sarath Reddy). Now, for each of those I showed a clear pattern, demonstrated with dates... seven steps. Step one- You Magunta or Raghav Reddy give one, two, or three statements, nothing talking about Kejriwal, not even a single word. So they are called exculpatory statements.
Step two- you are arrested after many months of the statement. Step three- They kept them in custody and maybe harassed or pressured them. Step four- They are granted bail by ED recording through the law officer through ASG that we do not object to bail because of 'back pain'. So, I told the court I wished everybody in the court got bail due to back pain. Step five- you come out and sing a song like a canary in your fifth statement or fourth statement about Kejriwal. Step six- immediately after that you are granted pardon and given an approver status.
All of them are either Approver's pardon or co-accused. I have cited the Supreme Court. Supreme Court has said that a co-accused or an approver is a most unworthy friend if at all called a friend. Its credibility is zero because it has bargained for freedom. So the principle of the law is if you rely only on approvers or co-accused then you must have corroborative evidence. "