LiquorPolicyCase – Delhi High Court Reviews CBI Challenge to Discharge Order
LiquorPolicyCase – The Delhi High Court on Monday took up a revision petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation challenging a trial court order that discharged former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia, and several others in the excise policy case. During the hearing, the High Court directed that certain remarks made by the trial court against CBI officials would remain temporarily suspended, observing that those comments could be considered prejudicial.
High Court Seeks Responses From Accused
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma asked Kejriwal, Sisodia and the other individuals named in the case to present their responses to the CBI’s petition. The court scheduled the next hearing for March 16, when it will examine the matter further.
The High Court also indicated that it would issue directions to the trial court to postpone proceedings in a related money laundering investigation being handled by the Enforcement Directorate. This step is intended to ensure that the two connected cases do not proceed simultaneously in a way that could complicate the judicial process.
CBI Challenges Trial Court Decision
Representing the CBI, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta urged the High Court to hear the matter on a fixed schedule and deliver a final decision within a defined timeframe. He argued that the trial court’s decision to discharge the accused was flawed and inconsistent with established principles of criminal law.
According to Mehta, the trial court’s findings effectively overturned the case before a proper trial could take place. He said the investigative agency had gathered extensive material indicating a possible conspiracy involving manipulation of the excise policy and the alleged payment of bribes.
Allegations Related to Policy Formulation
The case centers on alleged irregularities in the formulation and implementation of the Delhi government’s excise policy that was later withdrawn. Investigators claim that certain provisions of the policy were designed in a way that benefitted particular businesses in the liquor trade.
The CBI has maintained that the evidence collected during its probe, including statements from witnesses and approvers, supports the framing of charges against the accused individuals. Mehta told the court that these materials demonstrate the existence of a coordinated plan linked to the policy’s rollout.
Trial Court Earlier Discharged 23 Accused
On February 27, a trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 other individuals named in the case. In its order, the court concluded that the CBI’s allegations did not withstand judicial scrutiny and that the evidence presented by the agency was insufficient to proceed with charges.
The trial court also issued strong observations about the investigation, stating that the case had failed to establish a credible foundation for prosecution. As part of its ruling, the court directed that a departmental inquiry be initiated against the investigating officer involved in the matter.
Other Political Figures Named in the Case
Among the individuals discharged in the order was K Kavitha, president of Telangana Jagruthi, along with several others who had been accused in connection with the alleged irregularities.
The High Court’s decision to review the CBI’s revision petition now places the case back under judicial examination. The outcome of the upcoming hearings will determine whether the trial court’s discharge order will stand or whether further proceedings in the case will be revived.