Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on Thursday “reserved orders” in the bail plea filed by former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Manish Sisodia in a case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with the Delhi excise policy scam case.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma ordered, “Arguments heard. Order reserved”.

Sisodia is currently under judicial custody in both CBI and ED cases.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju appeared for CBI and Senior Advocates Dayan Krishnan and Mohit Mathur appeared for Sisodia.

Opposing the bail plea, ASG Raju had yesterday concluded his submissions in the bail plea. He had contended that if Manish Sisodia is given bail, he will influence evidence.

The ASG had submitted that "5% to 12% in the interest rate was made to get the kickback money. He (Sisodia) made the policy in such a way that guaranteed return in the form of kickbacks comes”. He had argued that it was a bonafide conspiracy with ulterior motives. There are no notes, no discussion, nothing at all, nothing on how 5-12% interest rates were made, he had said.

On the last hearing, the ASG had contended that “Sisodia concealed the legal expert's opinion given by eminent personalities as well. He hadn't mentioned it anywhere. It was ignored completely. They (members of AAP) did not include it in the policy”.

“Manish Sisodia and his colleagues wanted kickbacks, they wanted to change the policy. To get that they wanted private players as wholesalers. When they saw Ravi Dhawan Committee's suggestion, they (Aam Aadmi Party) understood they'll not be able to get kickbacks, they'll not be able to make money”, the ASG had contended.

He had argued, “The committee in its report had stated that by lottery system it will be purely on the basis of luck. It was not in favor of private players being involved. This was not in their favor. Sisodia did not like the report of the committee!”

Earlier, Senior Advocates Dayan Krishnan and Mohit Mathur, on behalf of Sisodia had contended that “no evidence of money trail had been found from Sisodia by the CBI”.  The senior counsels had submitted, “All the allegations about me being capable of influencing anyone, etc., is not there at all. All the allegations regarding money are likely to be coming towards me, all that is in the realm of likelihood. There is nothing on paper. Nothing concrete. No money trail has been found”.

Krishnan had contended that the agency had alleged that Sisodia did not cooperate in the investigation, which could not be ground for not allowing bail. “I am not required to cooperate, confess, or answer questions in the way they (CBI) want. I am required to answer in the way I want, that is the constitutional guarantee,” he had argued.

Background:

Notably, Sisodia’s bail plea in the CBI case was 'dismissed' by Special Judge MK Nagpal of Rouse Avenue Court, Delhi on March 31. While rejecting the bail plea, the court had stated that Sisodia played "the most important and vital role" in the criminal conspiracy, and he had been "deeply involved" in the formulation and implementation of the said policy.

Earlier, on February 28, a CJI DY Chandrachud led bench of the Supreme Court dismissed former Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi, Manish Sisodia's plea challenging his arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in an alleged case of corruption relating to liquor excise policy. The bench also comprising Justice PS Narasimha had held that "other efficacious remedies were available" to Sisodia.

It is CBI's case that there were alleged irregularities in the framing and implementation of the excise policy for the year 2021-22.  On February 26, the CBI commenced a second round of questioning after Sisodia was earlier questioned on October 17 last year. Chargesheet in the matter was filed on November 25, 2022.

Case Title: Manish Sisodia v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Statue: The Code of Criminal Procedure