Former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister and senior Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader, Manish Sisodia, has approached the Supreme Court, challenging the Delhi High Court’s decision to deny him bail in the excise policy scam case. The case, registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED), alleges that Delhi government officials colluded to grant liquor licenses to certain traders in exchange for bribes.
The Delhi High Court had previously denied bail to Sisodia in the ED case on July 3. Prior to that, it had rejected Sisodia’s bail plea in the CBI case related to the same scam. The central agencies’ case alleges that the excise policy was manipulated and profit margins altered to benefit certain traders, with kickbacks received in exchange.
The ED and the CBI registered cases related to the alleged scam after Delhi Lieutenant Governor (LG) VK Saxena recommended a CBI probe based on a report by the Delhi Chief Secretary. The report claimed that Sisodia violated statutory provisions and notified a policy with significant financial implications.
Although Sisodia was not initially named in the CBI’s chargesheet, the CBI later filed an additional chargesheet, listing him as an accused in the case. Sisodia maintains that the policy and the changes made in it were approved by the LG and that the CBI is now targeting the policy decisions of an elected government.
According to Sisodia, no money has been traced to him, and the agencies are re-evaluating a liquor policy that was formulated by the elected government and approved by the Lieutenant Governor (LG) of Delhi. In its order denying bail to Sisodia in the ED case, the High Court observed that the allegations against Sisodia are very serious and the matter has to be visited with a different approach because a deep-rooted conspiracy involving a huge loss of public funds has been alleged.
Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma stated that the excise policy case is a unique and peculiar case where it has been alleged that the Deputy Chief Minister framed a policy at the instance of some outsiders who were going to be its beneficiaries.
The appeal before the Supreme Court was filed through advocate Vivek Jain.