Supreme Court Questions Lack Of Evidence In Manish Sisodia's Bail Hearing
In a recent development concerning the bail petition of former Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia in the liquor policy case, the Supreme Court made some noteworthy observations. The court expressed concerns about the lack of a fully established chain of evidence against Mr. Sisodia and questioned the proof presented, which mainly relied on the statement of businessman Dinesh Arora, an accused-turned-approver in the case.
The bench, comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice SVN Bhatti, inquired about the origin of the alleged money received by Mr. Sisodia from what is referred to as the “liquor group.” They pointed out that there were claims of substantial sums, such as ₹100 crore and ₹30 crore, but questioned who had actually paid these amounts. They emphasized the need for concrete evidence beyond Arora’s statement.
The court also acknowledged the difficulty in establishing the money trail due to covert activities but reminded the enforcement agencies, such as the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation, of their responsibility in proving these allegations.
Regarding the charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the court clarified that it did not see Manish Sisodia’s direct involvement in money laundering. They raised questions about the connection between Sisodia and the proceeds of crime, emphasizing that PMLA deals with activities related to the proceeds of crime and not just money generation.
The court adjourned the hearing until the following week, leaving the case in progress. It’s worth noting that the court’s previous remark about implicating the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in the case was clarified as a legal question and not an attempt to implicate any political party.
This case has garnered significant attention, with the AAP alleging political vendetta, while Union Minister Anurag Thakur suggested that more developments may be forthcoming.
