New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday sought to know from the Enforcement Directorate as to how it will draw the line between policy decision of the Cabinet and criminality, and also if an increase in profit margin is enough to infer on a decision taken by the Cabinet, of an elected government.
Hearing bail pleas by former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister and AAP leader Manish Sisodia, in corruption and money-laundering cases, a bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan asked the ED’s counsel, if it is enough to draw inferences on the basis of that increasing the profit margin from 5 to 12 % was contrary to public interest, leading to disproportionate gains for others.
Additional solicitor general S V Raju, for the ED, said the increase in profit is not the case of the central agency, many factual things happened prior to this increase, including the meetings.
“Something more than all this, otherwise the Cabinet cannot function…at this stage of bail, strictly res-judicata won’t apply to us. Where do you draw the line between policy and criminality?...how do you per se infer," the bench asked him.
The ASG claimed Sisodia is not an innocent person, and he and the other accused wanted to make money out of this exercise and the first step was to change the entire excise policy.
He said they constituted an Expert Committee (the Dhawan Committee) to go into this issue as earlier distributors used to get a 5 % margin. But now, “Ravi Dhawan Committee says to remove them and appoint government company distributors and retain 5 %."
“They wanted to get over the Ravi Dhawan Committee report so they invited objections from the public, which was a façade. There is evidence to show Sisodia engineered emails to show that,” Raju alleged.
He contended they made a case to not accept the Dhawan Committee’s report.
Raju said Sisodia was heading the Group of Ministers, who were in charges of this excise policy and he was also interacting with Vijay Nair, the media adviser of AAP, and Nair had nothing to do with excise policy and nothing to do with the government.
Raju said Nair was tasked to find out businessmen, who were willing to give kickbacks and for that, the accused could suitably tweak the excise policy.
“We have digital evidence to that effect…Rs 100 crore bribe was demanded to be used for the Goa elections. Out of which we can track Rs 45 crore, where it has gone and who has paid,” Raju said, alleging Sisodia was neck-deep in the excise policy scam.
He also argued that profit margins cannot be increased arbitrarily without reason.
"No tenders, but licence given to anyone who pays Rs 5 crore,” he claimed.
Senior advocate A M Singhvi, on behalf of Sisodia asked why the petitioner's liberty should be restricted for 17 months was the larger question.
“He is not a flight risk, cannot influence witnesses or tamper with evidence at this stage," he said.
The hearing would continue on next Monday.
Sisodia was arrested in the case on February 26, 2023. He sought bail in cases filed by the CBI and the ED.