New Delhi, Jul 16 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought responses from the CBI and ED on AAP leader Manish Sisodia’s pleas seeking bail in the corruption and money laundering cases linked to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam.
Sisodia, a former deputy chief minister of Delhi, has sought bail contending that he has been in custody for 16 months and the trial against him was at the same stage as it was in October last year.
A bench headed by Justice B R Gavai agreed to hear the pleas filed by Sisodia who has also filed an application seeking revival of his bail petitions in the excise policy-linked corruption and money laundering cases.
“Issue notice, returnable on July 29,” said the bench, which also comprised Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice K V Viswanathan. Advocate Vivek Jain, appearing for Sisodia, told the bench that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader has been in custody for 16 months.
“I (Sisodia) have been inside for 16 months. I had come in October. This court said that if it remains at a snail’s pace, I can re-apply,” he said, adding, “The trial is at the same stage as it was in October 2023 when your lordships had given me liberty.” The bench sought responses from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Sisodia’s pleas and posted the matter for hearing on July 29.
Sisodia was arrested by the CBI on February 26, 2023, for his alleged role in the liquor policy case. The ED arrested him in the money laundering case stemming from the CBI FIR on March 9 last year.
He resigned from the Delhi cabinet on February 28 last year.
The matter relates to alleged corruption and money laundering in the formulation and execution of the Delhi government’s excise policy for 2021-22 which has now been scrapped.
On July 11, apex court judge Sanjay Kumar had recused himself from hearing Sisodia’s pleas in the case.
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Sisodia, had requested the bench to list the matter urgently and said the trial has not yet commenced in both cases.
On July 8, the top court agreed to list Sisodia’s pleas after Singhvi said an application has been filed for the revival of a disposed of petition seeking bail in these cases.
The plea said the law officer, appearing for the probe agencies, had told the top court on June 4 that the charge sheet and prosecution complaint in the main excise policy case and the linked money laundering matter would be filed on or before July 3.
On June 4, the apex court refused to entertain the bail pleas of Sisodia in cases lodged by the CBI and the ED in connection with the alleged Delhi liquor policy scam.
It had said Sisodia could revive his petitions for bail after the ED and the CBI file their final prosecution complaint and charge sheet respectively in the cases involving alleged corruption and money laundering.
A prosecution complaint is the ED’s equivalent of a charge sheet.
“In the light of the said submissions made and having regard to the fact that the period of ‘6-8 months’ fixed by this court by order dated October 30, 2023, having not come to an end, it would suffice to dispose of these petitions with liberty to the petitioner to revive his prayer afresh after filing of the final complaint/charge-sheet as assured by Solicitor General,” the bench had said in its June 4 order.
It had added that in the event of such a bail application being filed, the same would be considered on its own merits as already observed by this court in its October 30, 2023 order.
Sisodia had earlier moved the apex court challenging the Delhi High Court’s May 21 verdict which dismissed his bail pleas in cases probed by the two central agencies.
He had challenged in the high court a trial court’s April 30 order by which it rejected his bail applications in the cases involving alleged irregularities in the formulation and execution of the now-scrapped Delhi excise policy for 2021-22.
On October 30 last year, the top court denied him bail in the corruption and money laundering cases related to the alleged Delhi excise policy “scam”, saying the accusation of “windfall gains” of Rs 338 crore to wholesale liquor dealers was “tentatively supported” by evidence.
While dismissing the regular bail plea, the top court had given him the liberty to approach the courts for relief if there was a change in the circumstances or trial got protracted. PTI ABA ABA NSD NSD
About the Author
