After hearing the arguments, the Judge reserved the orders on the bail applications for January 9. Seeking grant of anticipatory bail, Pawan Kumar Ghai, the lawyer of the former trustees of LIT, claimed that his clients were innocent and have been falsely implicated by the Vigilance Bureau.

Ghai also denied the allegations levelled at the former trustees by the Vigilance Bureau. He argued that the Bureau filed special leave petition before the Supreme Court against the grant of anticipatory bail to former CM Captain Amarinder Singh.

Ghai claimed that in the SLP, the Vigilance Bureau had pleaded that trustees were ‘kept in dark’ about the decisions taken on the City Centre project, but now they have entirely changed their stand. Ghai claimed that the former trustees had already joined the investigation, as and when called by the officials of the Bureau. He further claimed that the Bureau had also not arrested them.

Ghai argued that the challan had been presented in the court, without arresting the former trustees in the case. He claimed that the trustees were not required for any custodial interrogation. The conclusion of trial, he added, would take a long time, and no useful purpose would be served by detaining them in jail. Ghai claimed that the High Court has already granted bail to the other co-accused.

The counsel for the Bureau, on the other hand, stressed that keeping in view the sensitivity of the case, the former trustees should not be granted anticipatory bail. Special Public Prosecutors District Attorney MS Goel and Deputy District Attorney ML Solanki, while opposing the bail plea, claimed that the former trustees also involved in this case. They alleged that the former trustees had received kickbacks of Rs one lakh each in the City Centre case. They claimed that these trustees were present when the bid was opened.