Aam Aadmi Party leader Manish Sisodia on Thursday moved the Supreme Court seeking bail in the cases filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Enforcement Directorate in connection with alleged irregularities in the national capital’s now-scrapped liquor policy, Bar and Bench reported.
Sisodia was denied bail by the Delhi High Court in the cases filed by the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate on May 30 and July 3. Prior to that, his bail applications in both cases were also rejected by the Rouse Avenue Court.
The former deputy chief minister of Delhi was arrested on February 26 in connection with the state government’s excise policy that came into effect in November 2021. On March 9, the Enforcement Directorate arrested him in the same case.
Under the excise policy, licences of 849 liquor shops were issued to private firms through open bidding. Earlier, four government corporations ran 475 liquor stores and the remaining 389 were private shops. The policy was withdrawn on July 30 after Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena recommended an inquiry into how it had been formulated and implemented.
The Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation have alleged that the excise policy was modified to ensure a 12% profit margin for wholesalers and a nearly 185% profit margin for retailers.
In his bail petitions, Sisodia had claimed that the central agencies had no evidence against him and that he was being singled out.
Produce Sisodia physically for hearing, court tells Delhi Police
A Delhi court on Thursday directed the police to produce Sisodia physically for a hearing in the liquor policy case, ANI reported.
Special judge MK Nagpal passed the order while disposing of the application of the Delhi Police which has sought to produce Sisodia before the court through a video conference, citing security concerns.
“Now accused Manish Sisodia will be produced physically before the court,” the judge ordered, adding that no public person or supporters of the Aam Aadmi Party should be present in the courtroom.
Advocate Vivek Jain, representing Sisodia, said that it is the duty of the police to provide protection to his client, according to ANI.
“There is only a distance of ten meters and 25 police personnel are there,” he argued. “He has been brought from a distance of 15 kilometres. What is the security concern in producing him physically in the courtroom?”
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!