Delay in excise policy case caused by filing of applications of accused, Delhi court says while denying bail to Manish Sisodia

“…it is therefore clear that the petitioner individually, as well as the various accused, have filed one or the other application/presented oral submissions frequently, some frivolous, that too in a piecemeal manner, apparently in the context of a concerted effort to accomplish the desired objective. the common objective of delaying the matter,” Justice Baweja noted. The court order also provided a list of 135 requests submitted by 31 defendants. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) said Sisodia would approach the Delhi High Court against the lower court’s denial of bail.

The court also noted that Sisodia’s wife had been suffering from multiple sclerosis for a long time and was undergoing medical treatment for the disease. It was found that Sisodia had not revealed any “imminent or urgent” need justifying his release on these grounds.

While Sisodia’s lawyer had earlier argued for his release on bail citing delay, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) argued that mere delay could not justify interim release if the offenses were serious by nature. nature.

The court said that “the steady progress of the case, despite apparent attempts to slow down its progress, cannot, under any circumstances, be equated with a ‘snail’s pace’.” In October, while denying Sisodia bail, the Supreme Court said he could reapply for bail if the trial moved “at a snail’s pace”.

Opposing his bail plea, the ED had argued that Sisodia had destroyed 14 mobile phones and there was a high chance of him tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses and suspects in the case of excise policy. Sisodia’s lawyer, for his part, argued that the accused should be released on bail if the court finds that the trial was not held for reasons not attributable to him.

Sisodia filed a bail application in the Rouse Avenue court in Delhi, months after the Supreme Court rejected it. The ED is investigating the money laundering aspect of the excise policy case and has informed the apex court that the trial would be completed within six to eight months. However, six months have passed since then and charges under the excise policy are yet to be made.

Sisodia was accused of interfering in the formulation of Delhi’s excise policy in an extra-procedural manner. He allegedly made policy changes to benefit certain entities in the alcohol sector, resulting in a loss of several hundred million dollars to the public treasury. He was first arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation in February 2023 and then by the ED in March the same year. The ED chargesheet named Sisodia as a “key conspirator” in the case, following which he resigned from the Delhi cabinet on February 28, 2023.

According to the ED’s allegations, wholesale distributors received a flat commission of Rs 581 crore due to an increase in commission (distribution charges) from 5 per cent under the previous policy to 12 per cent under the new excise policy, which was later canceled.

© L’Indian Express Pvt Ltd