Delhi HC gives Kejriwal, Sisodia four weeks to respond to CBI plea

The Delhi High Court on Monday granted former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia and other respondents four weeks to respond to additional written submissions filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation in its revision petition challenging their discharge in the Delhi excise policy case. Justice Manoj Jain heard the matter and scheduled the CBI’s revision petition for arguments on October 5 and 6. The proceedings stem from the agency’s challenge to a February 26 order of a special court that discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others in the corruption case linked to the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22.

CBI challenges discharge

The CBI moved the High Court after the Rouse Avenue Court declined to frame charges against all 23 accused in the case.

The agency has argued that the trial court’s discharge order was legally unsustainable and failed to properly consider material gathered during the investigation. It has sought to have the order set aside and proceedings against the accused revived.

The CBI maintains that the excise policy was allegedly manipulated during its formulation and implementation to benefit certain private players.

Kejriwal, Sisodia and the other accused have denied wrongdoing.

The High Court had earlier issued notices to the respondents on the CBI’s revision petition.

Accused oppose plea

Kejriwal and Sisodia have opposed the agency’s challenge and have also sought dismissal of the revision petition.

Their lawyers have questioned the manner in which the CBI approached the High Court, arguing that the revision was filed with unusual haste and without adequately addressing the detailed findings of the trial court.

The respondents have maintained that the special court examined the investigative material at length before concluding that there was insufficient basis to frame charges.

The latest four-week period will allow them to file their replies to the additional written submissions placed on record by the investigating agency.

Trial court order

On February 26, the special court discharged all 23 accused in the CBI case, including Kejriwal, Sisodia, BRS leader K Kavitha, AAP leader Durgesh Pathak and several businessmen and former officials.

The court concluded that the material presented by the CBI was insufficient to establish a prima facie case warranting a trial against the accused.

The discharge order was a major setback for the agency, which had investigated alleged irregularities in the formulation and implementation of Delhi’s excise policy for several years.

The CBI subsequently approached the High Court, arguing that important evidence and circumstances had not been properly appreciated by the trial court.

Policy under scanner

The Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22 was introduced with the stated objective of reforming the capital’s liquor trade and shifting retail operations away from government-run outlets to private operators.

The policy later became the subject of investigations following allegations of procedural irregularities and undue benefits being extended to private liquor businesses.

The CBI registered its case in 2022 following a recommendation for investigation into the formulation and implementation of the policy.

The agency alleged that changes were made to the policy as part of a conspiracy to favour certain participants in the liquor business in return for kickbacks. The accused have consistently rejected the allegations.

The policy was eventually withdrawn and Delhi returned to the earlier system of liquor sales.

Arguments in October

With the respondents now given four weeks to answer the CBI’s additional submissions, the substantive battle over the discharge order will resume in October.

The High Court has earmarked October 5 and 6 for arguments on the revision petition.

The hearings will determine whether the special court’s decision to discharge Kejriwal, Sisodia and the other accused should stand or whether the CBI’s challenge warrants further proceedings in the case.