AAP's Manish Sisodia.
Credit: PTI Photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed an application for bail filed by former Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi Manish Sisodia in the liquor policy scam case, relying upon the CBI's claim that it facilitated getting kickbacks or bribes from the wholesale distributors having substantial market share and turnover.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S V N Bhatti, however, expressed concern over prolonged period of incarceration suffered by Sisodia, saying Section 436A of the Criminal Procedure Code should not be construed as a mandate that an accused should not be granted bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act till he has suffered incarceration for the specified period.
"In view of the assurance given at the Bar on behalf of the prosecution that they shall conclude the trial by taking appropriate steps within next six to eight months, we give liberty to the appellant Sisodia to move a fresh application for bail in case of change in circumstances, or in case the trial is protracted and proceeds at a snail’s pace in next three months," the bench said.
In its order, the bench also said detention or jail before being pronounced guilty of an offence should not become punishment without trial. "If the trial gets protracted despite assurances of the prosecution, and it is clear that case will not be decided within a foreseeable time, the prayer for bail may be meritorious," the bench said.
The bench stressed the constitutional mandate is the higher law, and it is the basic right of the person charged of an offence and not convicted, that he be ensured and given a speedy trial.
"When the trial is not proceeding for reasons not attributable to the accused, the court, unless there are good reasons, may well be guided to exercise the power to grant bail. This would be truer where the trial would take years," the bench said.
Sisodia, 51, was arrested by the CBI on February 26, this year.
The CBI had lodged the case on August 17, 2022 under Section 120B IPC and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. A total of 15 persons were specifically named in the FIR, including Sisodia, who was the deputy Chief Minister as well as Excise Minister of the Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD) for various irregularities in framing and implementation of the now scrapped excise policy for the year 2021-22.
He was separately arrested by the Enforcement Directorate also in a case of money laundering in connection with the scam.
The agencies claimed that AAP used the illicit money obtained through the policy for campaigning in the Goa assembly elections. They also claimed that AAP was a beneficiary of the kickbacks received from stakeholders who got liquor licences as part of a quid pro quo.
In its order, the top court said prima facie, there is lack of clarity, as specific allegation on the involvement of the appellant Sisodia, direct or indirect, in the transfer of Rs 45 Cr to AAP for the Goa elections is missing.
The court noted the assertion in the complaint that kickback of Rs 100 crore was actually paid by the liquor group is somewhat a matter of debate.
The court, however, recapitulated the CBI's charges that the existing excise policy was changed to facilitate and get kickbacks and bribes from the wholesale distributors by enhancing their commission/fee from 5 per cent under the old policy to 12 per cent under the new policy.
Accordingly, a conspiracy was hatched to carefully draft the new policy, deviating from the expert opinion/views to create an eco-system to assure unjust enrichment of the wholesale distributors at the expense of the government exchequer or the consumer, it noted.
The CBI claimed the wholesale distributors earned Rs 338 crore which cannot be disputed.