The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has appealed to the Delhi High Court following a trial court’s decision to discharge all 23 accused individuals in the Delhi excise policy case. Among those discharged are former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia. A hearing is scheduled for March 9 before a Bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma.
Background
The appeal follows a ruling by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) Jitender Singh at Rouse Avenue Court. The judge discharged all accused, finding that the prosecution failed to establish a case for conspiracy or criminal intent related to the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy 2021–22.
The court determined that the CBI attempted to build a “conspiracy narrative” but relied on conjecture rather than concrete evidence. The court also criticized the agency’s reliance on statements from individuals granted pardons, stating that using such testimony to fill gaps in the investigation was improper.
Role of the Lieutenant Governor
The court’s ruling also addressed the role of the Lieutenant Governor’s office, observing that the then Lieutenant Governor was consulted and that the secretariat was involved in the policy’s processing. The court noted that the policy was not processed in isolation, but followed established constitutional channels.
The court rejected the prosecution’s claim that Kejriwal and Sisodia unilaterally altered the policy, citing documentary evidence of shared deliberation at multiple levels, including committee reports, departmental notes, and cabinet approvals.
What’s Next?
The Delhi High Court will now review the CBI’s challenge to the trial court’s discharge order on March 9. This proves possible the High Court could overturn the discharge and allow the case to proceed to trial. Alternatively, the High Court could uphold the trial court’s decision, effectively ending the case. The CBI has indicated it plans to challenge the decision.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the original allegation in this case?
The case originated from allegations that the Delhi government’s excise policy was designed to benefit certain private liquor players through reduced license fees and fixed profit margins, potentially leading to kickbacks and losses for the government.
What did the trial court uncover lacking in the CBI’s case?
The trial court found that the prosecution failed to establish any prima facie case of conspiracy or criminal intent in the formulation of the Delhi Excise Policy 2021–22, and that the evidence presented relied too heavily on conjecture.
What is the CBI’s response to the trial court’s decision?
The CBI has appealed the trial court’s decision to the Delhi High Court, and the matter is scheduled for a hearing on March 9.
As this case moves to the High Court, what implications might the outcome have for the future of policy-making and governance in Delhi?
