Manish Sisodia , the former deputy chief minister of Delhi, was initially detained by the CBI in February of last year and then by the ED a month later. He has been imprisoned for more than a year.
Manish Sisodia , the former deputy chief minister of Delhi and an accused party in the excise policy case, stated in court on Tuesday that the Central Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement Directorate have not been able to provide any evidence that he has received any money.
Representing Sisodia, who has been identified as a “key conspirator” in the case, senior attorney Mohit Mathur informed Special Judge Kaveri Baweja at Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi that the AAP leader was eligible for bail because “there is no loss to the government exchequer.” Nothing is lost for any one person. As customers, none of us have been defrauded of anything.
After being detained for the first time by the CBI in February of last year and the ED a month later, Sisodia has been detained for over a year. Manish Sisodia was identified as a “key conspirator” in the case in the ED chargesheet.
The former deputy chief minister is charged with engaging in extra-legal meddling in the formulation of the now-cancelled Delhi excise policy, modifying it to suit certain alcohol companies’ interests and costing the state exchequer several hundred crores.
Mathur further mentioned that there were indications indicating that the excise policy, which has since been abandoned, had actually increased government revenue.
Sisodia, according to the senior counsel, also passed the triple test for bail, which stipulates that an accused person cannot be granted bail unless it is proven that they pose no risk of fleeing, would not influence witnesses, and will not tamper with evidence. He stated that since Sisodia was no longer the deputy chief minister, he was no longer powerful.
“I’ve spent the last 13 months in detention.On Sisodia’s behalf, Mathur stated, “I have never abused the rights that the court has bestowed upon me. The Supreme Court granted release to Benoy Babu, a co-accused in the ED excise policy case, after he had served 13 months in jail for reasons of delay.
When Sisodia appeared before the Supreme Court in July of last year to request bail in the ED case, he disclosed that the agency had not been able to link him to any proceeds of crime. The agency was also forewarned by the Supreme Court that “two questions in the cross-examination” would cause the “case to fall flat.”
The ED and CBI were repeatedly informed by the highest court that Sisodia could not be kept “in jail indefinitely.”
However, on October 30, it refused to grant Sisodia bail. The Supreme Court denied his request to reexamine its bail decision on December 14. The Supreme Court declared that the Rs 338 crore “excess profit” that the wholesalers had made as a result of the policy’s modifications was the only “clear ground” in the PMLA case that was “tentatively supported by material and evidence.”
According to Mathur, the ED subsequently informed the SC that the inquiry would be finished in six to eight months, and that even though the apex court’s order had been in effect for six months, the investigation was still ongoing.
Mathur asserted, “The trial’s delay is not Sisodia’s fault,” adding that because the investigation into him was finished, he was qualified to be released on bond.
BY-HHM