The Supreme Court was hearing the bail plea of Aam Aadmi Party leader Manish Sisodia, who is in jail in the Delhi liquor scam. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who appeared on behalf of Sisodia, presented several arguments. He tried to explain that Sisodia has been in jail for so many days, but the ED has not been able to present solid evidence against him. Singhvi told the bench, what is the reason for keeping me (Sisodia) behind bars? No evidence has been brought forward so far, to which the ED lawyer gave such an answer that the judge postponed the decision on Sisodia’s bail.
A bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Vishwanathan heard Sisodia’s bail plea. Singhvi, on behalf of Sisodia, told the bench, why should Sisodia remain in jail even after 17 months, this is a big question of a person’s freedom. After all, what is the purpose of keeping me in jail? The whole case seems fabricated. ED has not been able to present any evidence so far, which indicates Sisodia’s direct involvement. So far, CBI and ED have presented a total of 493 witnesses and 69,000 pages of documents in the corruption and money laundering case, but Sisodia has not been found directly involved.
no fabricated case
The reply was then given by Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, who appeared on behalf of the ED. He told the court that this is not a fabricated case, as there are many evidences that point to Sisodia’s direct involvement. Opposing Singhvi’s arguments, Raju said, I have documents that prove Sisodia’s deep involvement in this case. It is not that he is an innocent person and he was picked up just like that.
Told why the case is getting delayed
S.V. Raju said, there was no delay on the part of the investigating agencies in the proceedings. Whenever there are such double cases, the investigating agencies take time to investigate and match. In this case also, the 5 months that were taken were right for the trial. This much time will definitely be taken. When Raju mentioned the excise policy, the bench asked, where do you draw the line between policy and crime? On this, SV Raju presented many arguments.
Mention of old decisions, but no relief
During the hearing on Monday, Singhvi also mentioned the Supreme Court’s orders of June 4 and October 30 last year. In both the cases, the Supreme Court had refused to grant bail to Sisodia. Singhvi said, the Supreme Court in its decision in October last year had relied on the assurance given by the ED, in which the ED had said that they would bring the case to trial in the next six to eight months. But this did not happen. Meanwhile, Raju said, Sisodia’s bail plea is not worth hearing. He will have to go to the trial court for relief. In its decision in October last year, the Supreme Court had said that the trial court should first decide on his bail. On this, the bench said, we will consider the objections. After this, the Supreme Court postponed the hearing on Sisodia’s bail to Tuesday. Arguments will be presented again from both sides on Tuesday i.e. today.
Tags: Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Delhi liquor scam, Manish sisodia, Supreme Court
FIRST PUBLISHED : August 6, 2024, 05:01 IST
