[Excise ‘Scam’] Delhi HC Issues Notice Over Manish Sisodia’s Plea Challenging ED’s Chargesheet Over Lack Of Sanction

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

A bench led by Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri scheduled the next hearing for December 20 after the ED’s special counsel requested an adjournment due to the unavailability of Additional Solicitor General SV Raju. The court will also hear a similar plea from Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal in the same case on that date.

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court issued a notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Monday (2nd Dec) regarding former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia’s plea, which challenges a city court’s decision to take cognisance of the charge sheet filed in the Delhi excise policy case.

A bench led by Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri scheduled the next hearing for December 20 after the ED’s special counsel requested an adjournment due to the unavailability of Additional Solicitor General SV Raju. The court will also hear a similar plea from Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal in the same case on that date.

Sisodia has requested the quashing of the charges, arguing that the alleged money laundering offense occurred while he was a public servant, and he is therefore entitled to protection under Section 197(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

This section, which the Supreme Court emphasized in its ruling on the Bibhu Prasad Acharya case, stipulates that no prosecution can proceed against a public servant without prior sanction from the competent authority.

This provision is mirrored in Section 218 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which replaced the CrPC in July.

READ ALSO: [Delhi Excise Policy] Manish Sisodia Moves Delhi HC To Challenge ED Chargesheet Over Sanction Lapse

The petition states that the allegations pertain to official actions performed by Sisodia in his capacity as a public servant. It further claims that the Enforcement Directorate filed the supplementary chargesheet without securing prior approval from the appropriate authority, a violation of legal procedures.

According to the plea, the Special Court’s decision to consider the chargesheet without the necessary sanction contradicts established legal precedents, rendering the prosecution unlawful.

The Supreme Court’s November 6 ruling confirmed that prior sanction is required for prosecuting public servants for money laundering. Kejriwal and senior Congress leader P Chidambaram have cited this ruling in their approach to the high court.

The trial against Chidambaram in the INX Media and Aircel Maxis case was stayed based on the same ruling. Sisodia contends that the ED did not obtain the necessary sanction to prosecute him, despite his status as a public servant at the time of the alleged offense.

Sisodia was accused of favoring private players in the formulation of the now-repealed 2021-22 excise policy and was arrested in February 2023. He was granted bail by the Supreme Court on August 9.

FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE