Delhi Liquor Policy Scam: Supreme Court reserves order on Manish Sisodia’s bail plea

Today (August 06, 2024), the Supreme Court (SC) bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan reserved its order on the bail plea filed by former Deputy Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Manish Sisodia in the money laundering case registered by the ED (Enforcement Directorate) in connection with the Delhi liquor Policy Scam case. Before reserving the order, the SC bench heard the contentions of the ED and Manish Sisodia. 

During the proceedings, the learned counsel appearing for Sisodia contended, “There is no statement about Manish Sisodia or WhatsApp chat with him. No evidence about hawala operators with him, no evidence of WhatsApp chat with Sisodia at all.” He further argued, “Sisodia has already undergone half of the minimum sentence here and there is no end to this period of incarceration. I am not seeking default bail. This case is not about the commencement of the trial but conclusion of trial. Earlier a date was given when it will commence and that period has also lapsed.” 

On the other hand, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju who appeared for the ED argued, “Our trial would have commenced and these documents were unwarranted but just because of these applications. The delay is completely attributable to them and not to the agency. Speedy trial cannot be fitted in a straightjacket formula and it is on a case-by-case basis and they don't want this to be heard on merits. So the best option (for them) is to delay it.” Disagreeing with this contention of the ED, AM Singhvi said, “All applications (filed by Sisodia) were allowed (by the trial court), and not challenged and there is no delay. The test is whether the accused has sabotaged the trial and not whether (he filed) applications filed one after another.” 

However, ASG maintained that the delay was due to Sisodia and said, “Instead of proceeding with trial, they gave applications after application citing that unrelied documents were being taken into consideration…here are some important witnesses who can be examined and may be tampered. These witnesses could be influenced and there is a likelihood for the same.” After hearing both sides, the SC bench reserved its order in the matter today.