Delhi excise policy case: ‘Enough is enough, accused trying to delay trial,’ CBI tells court

On Friday, D P Singh, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) who represented the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), told Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh of Rouse Avenue Court: “Enough is enough, my lord…the accused are trying to delay the trial.”

All of the accused in both the corruption case and the money laundering case registered by the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED), respectively, have been granted bail.

Exactly a year ago, the case was exactly where it is today.

Then Special Judge Kaveri Baweja had blamed the accused for causing a delay in the trial by filing “frivolous applications”.

The order of the court had stated that 135 applications had been moved by 31 accused in the case.

Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh has said that he will decide on the issue of supplying a complete list of unrelied documents to the accused by May 22.

While the central agencies have blamed the accused for causing a delay by moving various applications, the accused have often argued that the agencies have concealed some documents which could lead to their “discharge” in the case.

“If they think (accused persons) that we have purposely not made some documents relied upon, why haven’t they moved an application regarding the same? If these documents are so impeccable and can aid them, they have legal tools available for that,” argued SPP Singh.

“The reason we have not provided phones is because they have gone to the Forensic Science Lab for examination,” he said.

“The only other things left are 91 CrPC notices (summons to produce documents) and 160 CrPC notices (power to require attendance of witnesses)…these are tools of the investigator. We cannot increase the scope of unrelied-upon documents so much. These are part of the case diaries and for the court to see,” he added.

The SPP also argued that they were bombarded with emails regarding doubts about the documents.

“We have already given them all the documents. They are stalling the proceedings…let them inspect documents but this should not come in the way of arguments on charge,” he said.

“They can only question the investigation during the trial. They are turning this into a mini trial…they want something more than relied and unrelied upon documents which is a problem,” said the SPP.

On the other hand, the accused pinned the blame on the agencies for the delay.

Advocate Adit S Pujari, who represented accused Amandeep Singh Dhall, argued that the CBI was “suppressing” a document which his client needed if he were to be discharged.

“Against me, there are only five paragraphs in five chargesheets. They are trying to suppress some documents. If today, I am to be discharged, I will need these documents,” argued Pujari.

Calling the statement of witness Hariram Khatri contradictory, he said that an email showed that what he was saying was false.

“You are saying we bombarded you with emails. But we were not told to stop, and we did not get a response. How can you say that love was one sided?” he said.

“The CBI’s non-compliance is causing delays. There is a deliberate concealment on their part. In two to three hours, I can’t inspect stuff every day. I have to go to the malkhana [storehouse] to look at documents…time and again, lists are being changed. Is there any tampering with the documents?” said the advocate representing accused Vinod Chauhan.

Various accused had moved an application, demanding a complete list of unrelied documents.

The Excise Policy ‘scam’

Two cases have been registered in relation to the Delhi excise policy: one by the CBI, and the other, on alleged money laundering, by the ED. Almost all of the top AAP leaders in the capital were once behind bars, including Kejriwal, AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh, and former Delhi deputy CM Manish Sisodia.

The case arose out of a report submitted by Delhi Chief Secretary Naresh Kumar to Lieutenant Governor (LG) Vinai Kumar Saxena in July 2022, pointing to alleged procedural lapses in the formulation of the Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22.

The policy came into force in November 2021, but was scrapped in July 2022.

The chief secretary’s report said “arbitrary and unilateral decisions” taken by Sisodia in his capacity as excise minister had resulted in “financial losses to the exchequer” estimated at more than Rs 580 crore.

It was alleged that “kickbacks…received by the AAP Delhi government and AAP leaders” from owners and operators of alcohol businesses for preferential treatment such as discounts and extensions in licence fee, waiver on penalties and relief due to disruptions caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, etc., were used to “influence” the Assembly elections in Punjab and Goa in early 2022.

The ED alleged that the scam was to give the wholesale liquor business to private entities and fix a 12 per cent margin, for a 6 per cent kickback.

In its first prosecution complaint in November 2021, the ED said the policy was “formulated with deliberate loopholes” that “promoted cartel formations through the back door” to benefit AAP leaders.