New Delhi: Whatever arguments Manish Sisodia’s lawyer gave in the Delhi High Court for granting bail, the investigating agencies ED and CBI opposed it. However, the court reserved the decision after hearing the arguments of both the parties. In the High Court, on behalf of Sisodia, lawyer Dayan Krishnan argued that investigation is going on in both the cases registered by CBI and ED. The accused are still being arrested. The trial has not started yet, while the investigating agency had assured the Supreme Court that the trial would be completed in 6-8 months.
Sisodia’s lawyer said in the High Court that speedy trial cannot be ignored by ignoring legal procedures. The court should see whether Sisodia has deliberately delayed the trial? When the investigation is still going on then there is no question of early conclusion of this case? Is it that we are all sitting in Tihar jail and planning to delay the trial? The lawyer said that after the rejection of Sisodia’s bail, the three accused have got relief from the Supreme Court. Binoy Babu in the ED case, Sanjay Singh in the ED case and recently Arvind Kejriwal, as far as my escape is concerned, there is no threat. I have been in custody for 14.5 months.
Sisodia gave these arguments in defense
Sisodia’s lawyer said that there has been no progress at all in the trial of this case. In fact, the case has not even reached the hearing stage. The lawyer appearing for Sisodia has questioned the trial court’s conclusion of holding the accused responsible for the delay in the trial. The lawyer said that the petition filed by Sisodia cannot be called a futile petition. If it was so then the court should not have accepted him for hearing. If there is a delay in the trial, then the attitude of the investigating agencies is responsible for it.
ED’s argument opposed
Advocate Zoeb Hussain, appearing for the investigating agency, told the court that we will make Aam Aadmi Party an accused in this case. Supplementary charge sheet will be filed in this regard. Sisodia’s lawyer Mohit Mathur said that ED and CBI had assured the court that they would complete the trial in six to eight months, but they have not done anything to suggest that the trial will be completed in six to eight months. .
17 accused and 250 applications: ED
ED argued in the High Court that delay in trial cannot be the only basis for considering the bail petition. The Supreme Court did not say anywhere that the trial court would consider Sisodia’s bail application on this basis alone or would not consider the merits of the case. ED lawyer Zoeb Hussain said that at the stage of sorting of documents, 95 applications were filed on behalf of 31 accused. Despite the arrest of only 17 accused in this case, 250 applications have been filed. In the order, the judge has held the accused responsible for the delay in the trial, it is because of this attitude of the accused.
ED cited Satyendra Jain case
ED lawyer Zoeb Hussain, citing the Supreme Court’s decision on the bail of Satyendra Jain, said that the Supreme Court has recently rejected the delay in the hearing as the only basis for granting bail. ED said that the crime of money laundering has been considered as serious a crime as terrorism, the validity of Section 45 of PMLA has also been upheld by the Supreme Court. ED said that the ill-gotten money was used for election purposes. The entire system has been damaged and has to be dealt with. Therefore, delay in this case cannot be the sole basis for granting bail.
We have digital evidence: ED
ED said that bail cannot be granted merely citing delay. Merit will also have to be seen. The Supreme Court had also said this. Sisodia was part of GOM, held the post of Deputy Chief Minister and was also looking after the Excise Department. We have digital evidence, statements of those who gave bribes. Bribe money was used in Goa elections. Sisodia had asked Dinesh Arora to work with Vijay Nair. ED said that Vijay Nair was known to those who gave bribes. Nair had assured the companies that he would give policy benefits provided they give us Rs 100 crore for party donations, hence Manish Sisodia rejected the expert committee’s recommendation that the government should control wholesale sales. Sisodia pretended to have public approval and invited suggestions on email. ED said that Sisodia ensured that IndoSpirits got L1 license. Therefore he instructed Dinesh Arora to work together with Vijay Nair. As long as the new liquor policy was in force, it helped IndoSpirits earn a profit of Rs 192 crore during these 11 months.
The CBI lawyer said that Sisodia is a powerful person, he can tamper with the evidence. His party is in power, he can put pressure on the bureaucrats. Sisodia’s lawyer Mohit Mathur said that in another court it was argued that it is not the AAP government, it is the LG government.
Tags: DELHI HIGH COURT, Delhi liquor scam, Manish Sisodia
FIRST PUBLISHED: May 14, 2024, 20:53 IST