New Delhi:

Bail or no bail? That is the question the Supreme Court will answer this morning as it rules on a plea by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal following his arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation in June, in the alleged liquor excise policy scam.

Should it rule in his favour, Mr Kejriwal will be released nearly six months after he was first arrested – by the Enforcement Directorate – and two months after getting bail for that arrest.

The Aam Aadmi Party boss could not leave then – on July 12 – as he had been arrested by the CBI just a few weeks earlier, after the ED dropped its challenge, in connection with the same case.

In various forums since, including in the Supreme Court in this round of petitions, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Mr Kejriwal criticised that second arrest as an “insurance”, arguing it was designed to keep the AAP leader in jail, and his party on edge, before February’s Delhi election.

Last week, in the final hearing before the court withdrew to decide, he pointed out his client had already satisfied the ‘triple test’ legal principle for bail, since the same court had given him bail in the ED case.

READ | Big Supreme Court Relief For Arvind Kejriwal In Delhi Liquor Policy Case

The CBI has repeatedly pointed to what it believes is a mountain of evidence against Mr Kejriwal, most of which is drawn from testimony of ‘approvers’, i.e., former accused who have been pardoned, or will receive lesser sentences, for testifying against the Chief Minister.

The agency, like the ED, believes Mr Kejriwal played a key role in drafting and clearing the controversial November 2021 liquor excise policy, which was withdrawn eight months later.

The court, though, waved away an appeal by the CBI – that releasing Mr Kejriwal now, after he had been denied relief by the High Court – would “demoralise” that forum. “Don’t say that…” a bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Surya Kant, who will deliver today’s verdict, had said.

READ | “Don’t Say…”: Top Court On CBI’s Argument Against Bail For Kejriwal

It did, however, express concern over agencies seeming to rely on ‘approvers’ to make their case; in releasing Telangana politician K Kavitha, another accused in this case, it noted “You have to be fair… a person who incriminates himself is made a witness? What is this fairness?”

READ | “What Is This ‘Fairness’?” Top Court To Agencies In Liquor Policy Case

The run-up to this verdict has also seen the Supreme Court highlight the ‘bail is the rule, jail is the exception’ principle, laid down in 1977 by Justice Krishna Iyer, in connection with other cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, under which Mr Kejriwal faces charges.

The court has previously also reasoned that provisions for bail in the PMLA – under Section 45 of the law, which sets out two additional conditions for release – cannot overturn the primacy of an individual’s right to liberty. The note has been interpreted by many to mean there can be no argument to deny bail to a money-laundering accused, assuming other conditions are met.

After Singh, Sisodia, Kavitha, Next Kejriwal?

If he does get bail now, Mr Kejriwal will be the fifth, and most high-profile, opposition leader to leave jail after being arrested in this case. Three of those released so far are his former deputy, Manish Sisodia, AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh, and K Kavitha. The fifth was AAP leader Durgesh Pathak.

The three big names were released by the Supreme Court, which noted, in each case that authorities could not hold accused persons in prison indefinitely and without trial; in Mr Sisodia’s case last month the court called out the “travesty of justice” and flagged violation of a citizen’s right to liberty.

READ | “Travesty Of Justice”: Sisodia Gets Bail, Supreme Court Slams Delay

In April, while releasing Mr Singh, the court asked the arresting agency, the ED, why he had been jailed for six months without a trial and also pointed out it had failed to recover any of the Rs 2 crore he allegedly received as a bribe.

READ | “Just Because Woman Is Educated…”: Top Court As K Kavitha Gets Bail

Also last month, while releasing Ms Kavitha, the Supreme Court, once again, observed the Bharat Rashtra Samithi leader could not remain in jail if “likelihood trial in near future is impossible”.

Delhi Liquor Policy Case Explained

The Delhi liquor excise policy case involves allegations that Mr Kejriwal and the AAP received kickbacks of Rs 100 crore, including significant payments from a ‘South group’ led by Ms Kavitha, for allotment of wholesale licences. The ED and CBI believe this money was then used by the AAP to fund election campaigns, including that for the 2022 Goa Assembly election.

NDTV Explains | In Liquor Case, 193 Cr Profits, Kickback For AAP, Says ED, CBI

Arvind Kejriwal and the AAP, and Ms Kavitha and her party, the BRS of former Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao, have denied all charges, and counter-accused the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, to whom federal agencies like the ED and CBI report, of mounting a campaign against its critics and opposition leaders, particularly before elections.

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.

New Delhi:

If Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) benefited from Delhi’s now-scrapped liquor policy, why is it not an accused in the money laundering case relating to alleged irregularities, the Supreme Court asked the Enforcement Directorate (ED) today.

The bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice SV Bhatti was hearing a request for bail by Manish Sisodia, Delhi’s former Deputy Chief Minister who was arrested in February in a money laundering case linked to the excise policy.

“As far as PMLA is concerned, your whole case is that the benefits went to a political party. That political party is still not made an accused or Impleaded. How do you answer that? The political party is the beneficiary according to you,” the bench asked. 

The Supreme Court also asked if a cabinet note can be examined in a court of law. “I believe there are specific Constitution bench judgments barring us from examining cabinet notes. I do not know if it applies to Delhi, because it is a Union Territory. Though they have not raised it. Like the issue of how we cannot get into what is said in Parliament, now that has been referred to a larger bench,” Justice Khanna said.

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who represented ED, will respond to both queries tomorrow.

Pressing for a bail order for Mr Sisiodia, his counsel Abhishek Singhvi listed how accused in the case have turned approvers and have been granted bail, but Mr Sisodia has been denied relief.

The 51-year-old AAP leader, effectively Number 2 in the party after Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, has denied any wrongdoing and alleged that the central agencies had cooked up a case for BJP’s political goals.

The case against Mr Sisodia is centred around a liquor policy introduced by the Arvind Kejriwal government in November 2021. Under the policy, the government withdrew from retail sale of liquor and allowed private licensees to run stores. A government report later flagged alleged irregularities and “undue benefits” to liquor licencees. The case is being investigated by the CBI and the ED.

New Delhi:

The Enforcement Directorate on Wednesday searched Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh’s home in Delhi over a money laundering case linked to the liquor policy case that haunts the ruling Aam Aadmi Party.

Mr Singh joins Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, his former deputy Manish Sisodia, Telangana politician K Kavitha, and others in being raided, questioned or arrested, or all three in connection with alleged corruption in the now-withdrawn liquor sales policy introduced by the Delhi government in 2021.

READ | Searches At AAP’s Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh’s House In Delhi Liquor Policy Case

Mr Sisodia was arrested in March and has failed in repeated attempts to get bail.

READ | CBI Explains Why Manish Sisodia Was Arrested After 8-Hour Questioning

Months before today’s raids, a defiant Mr Singh posed next to posters outside his home “welcoming” the Enforcement Directorate; that photo was re-shared on X by the AAP, with fire emojis, this morning.

ED Raids On Sanjay Singh

Today’s raids against Mr Singh comes after he was named by an accused in the case – businessman Dinesh Arora – who later became an ‘approver’, and a font of information for the authorities.

READ | Delhi Liquor Policy Case Explained: Allegations, Investigations, Arrests

Mr Arora was released on bail on August 1.

The agency believes Sanjay Singh arranged the meeting between Dinesh Arora and Manish Sisodia, who has been arrested by both the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation.

Mr Sisodia was then the Delhi government’s excise minister.

The Enforcement Directorate, which has filed three chargesheets so far, has never actually named Sanjay Singh as an accused nor summoned him to record a statement. The agency has, however, referred to the AAP leader in its documents – something that sparked a massive row of its own.

A furious Mr Singh claimed a conspiracy to “tarnish” his political credentials and image. He wrote to the Union Finance Secretary (the Enforcement Directorate reports to the Finance Ministry) for permission to prosecute the agency chief for making “false and derogatory claims” against him.

This was after the central agency told the courts one (of four) reference to Mr Singh was a “typographical/clerical error”; the agency said it wanted to name Rahul Singh – then the Delhi excise commissioner – at that place, and that naming Sanjay Singh was an “inadvertent error”.

The AAP, however, alleged Mr Singh’s name has been mentioned in the chargesheet “at the behest of the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office)” to defame the party and its leaders. Mr Singh slammed the agency for conducting “a baseless” probe into the alleged scam.

Arvind Kejriwal Responds

Meanwhile, Delhi Chief Minister and AAP boss Arvind Kejriwal came out in support of his colleague.

READ | “1,000 Searches But Nothing”: Arvind Kejriwal As AAP MP Is Raided

He has accused the Enforcement Directorate of acting on behalf of the BJP (he did not name the party) to target rivals ahead of next year’s general election. Mr Kejriwal also claimed “more than 1,000 raids” had failed to find “a single paise” of illegally acquired money.

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.