On July 6, a Delhi Court directed Delhi Police to produce Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and former Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi Manish Sisodia physically for the next hearing in the Delhi Liquor Scam case. The case has been listed for hearing on July 31.
Rouse Avenue Court’s Special Judge (PC Act) MK Nagpal passed the direction while disposing of the application of Delhi police seeking production of Manish Sisodia through video conferencing for the hearing. Delhi Police had stated the security concern in producing him physically in the courtroom.
“Now accused Manish Sisodia will be produced physically before the court,” the judge ordered, directing that no public persons or AAP supporters be allowed in the courtroom. The court said that media persons are also directed to maintain a safe distance from the accused. In case of any violations of this direction, the lock-up in charge shall bring it to the court’s notice, the judge directed.
During the CBI case hearing, Manish Sisodia was produced through video conferencing. He also told the court that he has no issue with video conferencing but wished to be produced physically. The court asked the counsel appearing for Sisodia, “What is the difficulty for police to produce Sisodia physically in the court.” The court asked who would be responsible if any untoward incident happened.
Manish Sisodia’s counsel, Advocate Vivek Jain, said, “It is the duty of the police to protect him. There is only a distance of ten meters and 25 police personnel are there. He has been brought from a distance of 15 kilometres. What is the security concern in producing him physically in the courtroom.”
The court added, “What prejudice is being caused if he is produced through video conferencing?” Video conferencing is as good as physical production, the judge added.
After hearing the submissions, the court said, “I will not allow the meeting with party workers in the courtroom. From the next date you will be produced physically in the courtroom.” The judge ordered that Manish Sisodia be physically produced in the court from the next date.
The court noted that an application was moved, citing some incidents of first June 2023 when the accused was produced in the Enforcement Directorate (ED) case, and some allegations of man-handling of the accused by security personnel were raised. On that day, some supporters and media persons were present there. Police said that they tried to be too close to the accused, the court noted.
Manish Sisodia’s counsel said he has a right to be physically produced for an effective hearing. The rights of the accused to be produced in court should not be curtailed.
The court also directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to supply copies of the main charge sheet to the accused who are named in the supplementary charge sheet and copies of the supplementary charge sheet along with documents to the accused who were named in the main charge sheet and have not received the same. The court also directed the agency to supply copies of legible documents to the accused.
Delhi High Court Refuses Bail to Manish Sisodia
On July 3, the Delhi High Court refused bail to Manish Sisodia in the ED case concerning money laundering related to the Delhi Liquor Scam. The court noted that the special judge’s order denying bail to the accused, Manish Sisodia was well-reasoned and passed based on the material on record. The court said, “The court does not find any infirmity or illegality in the order of the special judge.”
The court further noted that it earlier denied bail to Manish Sisodia in the CBI case concerning the Delhi Liquor Scam. The court said that the allegations against Manish Sisodia were extremely serious in nature and that it cannot forget the positions held by him.
‘Evidence Speaks Volumes of His Involvement’: Special Court
On April 28, Special Judge MK Nagpal refused bail to Manish Sisodia in the ED case concerning the Delhi Liquor Scam, stating that the accused “was not only an architect of above criminal conspiracy, but also the brain behind insertion of clauses of 12% profit margin for wholesalers and of enhancement of eligibility criteria for wholesalers from Rs. 100 crores to Rs. 500 crores.”
The special court said that Manish Sisodia was connected to the generation of “proceeds of crime” of around Rs 100 crores as advance kickbacks for the insertion of favourable clauses for the benefit of the ‘conspirators.’
The special court said, “Thus, in view of the above background, serious nature of allegations made and role played by the applicant in above criminal conspiracy, his connection with the activities relating to generation or acquisition and use etc. of the above proceeds of crime within the meaning of Section 3 of the PMLA and the oral and documentary evidence collected in support of the same and as placed for perusal of the court, this court is of the considered opinion that even if the rigors and restrictions contained U/S 45 of the PMLA are viewed and construed reasonably, the prosecution has still been able to show a genuine and prima facie case for involvement of the applicant in commission of the alleged offence of money laundering.”
The special court noted that the evidence placed on record “speaks volumes” of his involvement in the commission of the offence. “Hence, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant in this case of economic offences having serious repercussions upon the general public and society at large as the evidence collected during investigation speaks volumes of his involvement in commission of the said offence,” the special court said.
[with inputs from ANI]
