Delhi High Court Today (May 14th) reserved its decision on Sisodia’s bail request after considering extensive arguments presented by the AAP leader’s legal team, as well as those from the CBI and the ED. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) informed that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) will be officially charged in the Delhi excise policy case.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) informed the Delhi High Court today that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) would officially be designated as an accused party in the Delhi excise policy case. This revelation was disclosed by the ED’s special counsel, Zoheb Hussain, before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma during proceedings held this afternoon.
The disclosure occurred within the context of arguments opposing the bail application lodged by AAP leader and former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia in the same case.
In response, Sisodia’s legal representative contended that his client was entitled to bail. Senior Advocate Mohit Mathur argued,
“Post dismissal of my bail, three accused have gotten some relief from the Supreme Court. Benoy Babu in ED case. Sanjay Singh, again in ED case and Arvind Kejriwal most recently. There is no threat as far as my running away is concerned. They cannot escape the fact that they did not arrest me before filing of the chargesheet. I have been in custody for 14.5 months.”
Following extensive deliberations, the Court reserved its judgment on the matter today. Sisodia has been in custody since February 26, 2023, under scrutiny from both the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the ED concerning the Delhi excise policy case.
The case revolves around allegations suggesting collusion among Delhi government officials to grant liquor licenses to specific traders in exchange for bribes. It is alleged that these officials manipulated the excise policy to favor particular liquor vendors.
Sisodia’s bail plea had been dismissed by a Delhi court on April 30, 2024, marking the second occasion the trial court rejected his application in both the CBI and ED cases. Earlier, in 2023, his initial round of bail applications had also been denied.
The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court’s decisions, a stance subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court in October 2023. However, the Supreme Court indicated that Sisodia could reapply for bail if the trial progressed at a sluggish pace, prompting his renewed bail pleas.
The blame for the delay in the trial involving Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Manish Sisodia has become a focal point of contention between his legal representatives and the Enforcement Directorate (ED), as evidenced by recent courtroom exchanges.
Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan, representing Sisodia, highlighted the prolonged investigative phase as a significant factor. He asserted,
“The investigation in both cases is still going on. Arrests are still going on in this … There is absolutely no progress in this trial. In fact, we have not even reached the stage of trial.”
Krishnan further contested the notion that efforts to delay the trial were orchestrated by Sisodia, revealing that certain applications deemed as such were actually filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and other co-accused.
He questioned the trial court judge’s rationale, emphasizing,
“Where does the trial court judge get that all of us are sitting in Tihar jail and conspiring to delay the trial?”
Krishnan also accused the ED of contributing to trial delays, citing instances of sudden document insertions and supplementary complaints.
Senior advocate Mohit Mathur echoed these sentiments, challenging the trial court’s characterization of the accused as conspirators. He argued,
“This order (by the trial court) is completely contrary to Article 21 and right to speedy trial,”
-highlighting concerns regarding judicial impartiality.
However, representing the ED, special counsel Zoheb Hossain countered these assertions, asserting that the Supreme Court had not restricted the trial court’s authority to assess Sisodia’s bail plea on its merits. He clarified,
“The right to speedy trial will one of the factors that the court may consider.”
Hossain also rebuffed Sisodia’s claim that the ED was responsible for trial delays, stating,
“No blame can be put to the prosecution.”
In defense of their position, the ED argued that Sisodia played a pivotal role in the alleged Delhi excise policy scam, given his influential position within the AAP. Hossain emphasized,
“Manish Sisodia played a key role.”
He further alleged that Sisodia tampered with evidence, citing instances of phone changes and destruction of documents.
These arguments were reinforced by the CBI’s Special Public Prosecutor Ripudaman Bhardwaj, who highlighted Sisodia’s purported power to manipulate evidence and influence bureaucrats due to his political stature.
This exchange underscores the complex legal dynamics surrounding Sisodia’s case, highlighting divergent perspectives on the causes of trial delays and the culpability of the accused.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Manish Sisodia
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Arvind Kejriwal
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
