Arvind Kejriwal News Highlights: Discharge order can’t remain on record even for a second: CBI to Delhi High Court in liquor policy case

Hearing concludes for the day, matter listed for further hearing on April 6

Bench: Interim order to continue

Bench: List it on April 6.

SG: This has become a pattern

SG Mehta : Order is perverse.

Hariharan: Just because it is not in your favour, it is perverse?

Senior advocate Shadan farasat: We have been discharged, There is no urgency

Mehta: The order can’t be kept on record for more than a second

SG Mehta: I have to say something, It is their right to challenge but if it is the ground for adjournment, then they should ensure that objections are removed and it is listed for hearing.

Bench: Is everyone seeking time to file a reply?

SG Mehta: All respondents were served advance and after issuance of notice

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma will hear the matter shortly.

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 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.

The CBI had submitted before the high court that the trial court dealt with ‘separate limbs of conspiracy in isolation’ by ‘selective reading of the prosecution case, disregarding the material showing culpability of the accused’. It has further argued that the trial court has ‘given its own interpretation to various factual aspects and statements recorded by (CBI) and to documents attached,’ while discarding the approver statements on ‘absolutely untenable grounds’. CBI also contended in its plea before the high court that the evidentiary value of statements, of both witnesses and approvers, is a subject matter of trial.

The Delhi High Court had earlier observed that the trial court’s remarks on the CBI’s investigating officer in the excise policy case were prima facie foundationally misconceived and it stayed the trial court’s observations made against the investigating officer including the direction recommending departmental action against him.

“This Court takes note of the fact that such scathing remarks recorded in the impugned order, and the reasons given for passing such remarks including, concluding that the investigating officer has abused his official position to conduct unfair investigation, are prima facie foundationally misconceived especially when made at the stage of charge itself,” the order read.

Yesterday, Kejriwal had approached the Supreme Court challenging the Delhi High Court’s rejection of his plea to transfer the hearing from the bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.

Delhi High Court's Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya noted in the communication: “The petition is assigned to the Hon’ble judge as per the current roster. Any call of recusal has to be taken by the Hon’ble judge. I, however, do not find any reason to transfer the petition by passing an order on the administrative side.”