The Supreme Court, while hearing a bail plea of former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia in the liquor policy case, questioned the Enforcement Directorate on Monday on where it would draw the line between policy and criminality, Live Law reported.
A bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan asked Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who appeared for the central agency, how wrongdoing would be inferred in matters related to government policy.
Justice Viswanathan noted that a component of the liquor policy case was about the commission for wholesalers being increased from 5% to 12%, and asked if this was “per se enough to draw an inference on a Cabinet decision”, Live Law reported.
After hearing arguments in the matter on Monday and Tuesday, the court reserved its verdict on Sisodia’s petition for bail.
Sisodia has sought bail in the separate corruption and money laundering cases linked to the alleged scam contending that he has been in custody for 17 months and trial against him has not yet started. The former deputy chief minister was arrested on February 24, 2023.
The Enforcement Directorate’s case is based on a first information report registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation alleging irregularities in the Delhi government’s now-scrapped liquor policy.
The agencies have alleged that Delhi’s Aam Aadmi Party government modified the policy to ensure a 12% profit margin for wholesalers and a nearly 185% profit margin for retailers.
At Monday’s hearing, Raju claimed that the central agency has the documents to show Sisodia’s “neck-deep involvement” in the matter, reported PTI.
“It is not as if he is an innocent person and picked up,” he told the court.
On the other hand, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Sisodia, referred to a Supreme Court order from October 30 last year denying bail to the Aam Aadmi Party leader. He said that the court had then taken note of the prosecution’s statement that the trial would be completed in six to eight months.
Singhvi noted that the Supreme Court had allowed Sisodia to move a fresh bail petition if the trial got delayed.
The matter was re-listed for Tuesday as the hearing could not be concluded.
At the hearing on Tuesday, the bench asked the Enforcement Directorate how long it would take to complete the trial in the case, Bar and Bench reported. “Where is light at the end of the tunnel and how long will it take,” it asked.
The court also questioned the central agency’s argument that Sisodia had filed multiple applications before the trial court seeking various documents, which led to a delay in the trial.
“None of the applications have been rejected saying it is vexatious or something,” Gavai remarked. “You have only supplied those documents after they moved the applications.”
However, Raju said that the delay was attributable solely to Sisodia, according to Bar and Bench.
Singhvi, in response, said that all the applications filed by Sisodia were allowed by the trial court. “The test is whether the accused has sabotaged the trial and not whether [he filed] applications filed one after another.”
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!