Liquor Policy: Delhi court denies bail to AAP's Manish Sisodia in money laundering case

The Rouse Avenue Court on Friday denied bail to Delhi`s former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia in a money laundering case in connection with an alleged Excise scam in the national capital. Special Judge MK Nagpal on Friday dismissed Sisodia's bail plea in the money laundering case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Earlier, appearing for Sisodia, Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan submitted that it is not the job of the ED to tell what happened in the GoM and the cabinet, the job of the ED should be to tell that if any crime was committed, who benefited from it. The lawyer said that Sisodia cannot be kept in custody only on the basis of speculation. He claimed that no money laundering case is made out against the Aam Aadmi Party leader.

Enforcement Directorate had opposed the bail plea and said "an illegal ecosystem was created in view to give illegal benefits to liquor cartels to get kickbacks". Appearing for ED, Zohaib Hossain submitted before the Court that all the elements of conspiracy are present here in the matter.

Conspiracy is hatched in secrecy, the policy made in the public domain, submitted ED lawyer and also said every process of activity dealing with proceeds of crime is money laundering. ED's lawyer further alleged that Sisodia played a key role in modifying and implementing the modified excise policy.

READ | Supreme Court same-sex marriage hearing: What are we fighting for?

"We have proof that the policy was modified without any deliberation and discussion. And we also have sufficient statements from various concerned persons to show that the profit margin increased from 6 per cent to 12 pc was meant as kickbacks," the ED's lawyer said.

In the matter, the expert committee suggested that individuals will apply and they will get two retail vends. This was to avoid cartelisation. This was supposed to happen through the lottery system but Manish Sisodia preferred the limited entity model, the lawyer claimed.

ED further said that, if the policy was genuine, why did Manish Sisodia plant emails in favour of the policy? Emails were planted through Minority Commission Chairman. Sisodia got emails planted on the mail address of the excise dept which was the same address where the public comments were sought obverse the policy. Fabricated emails to show public approval for a policy. This is a sham approval, ED alleged.

On the wife's health, ED submitted that other people and family were taking care of Sisodia`s wife for a long. While he was holding 18 portfolios and was holding public meetings, there were other people attending to his wife. The humanitarian ground can`t be used here, says ED counsel.

Earlier, appearing for Manish Sisodia, Advocate Vivek Jain argued that no PMLA case has been made against him. Section 45 of PMLA would come against him only if an offence under Section 3 is made outED`s reply opposing Sisodia`s bail doesn`t even show he has concealed any proceeds of crime or acquired any proceeds of crime, or he projected proceeds of crime.

READ | Chattisgarh CM Baghel slams BJP MLA's 'Vishkanya' remarks for Sonia Gandhi, demands reply from PM Modi, Amit Shah

Not a single rupee has come into his account or his family's account. They have raided his home, and they have checked his bank accounts. They even have gone to his native place, Jain argued. Manish Sisodia was physically produced before the Court on Tuesday during the arguments of his bail plea.

The Rouse Avenue Court was hearing a bail plea of Delhi`s former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia in a money laundering case pertaining to alleged irregularities in the framing and implementation of the excise policy of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD).

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on March 9 arrested former Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia in the liquor policy case, after hours of questioning at Tihar Jail.Sisodia was arrested by the CBI earlier in its ongoing investigation of a case related to alleged irregularities in the framing and implementation of the excise policy of the GNCTD.