Delhi Excise 'scam': Supreme Court grills CBI, Enforcement Directorate

New Delhi : The Supreme Court on Thursday posed a volley of questions to the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate about the Delhi excise policy 'scam' and asked the anti-money laundering agency how a case was made out against former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia.

The SC expressed reservations about the admissibility of these messages and asked: "Have you seen them (Vijay Nair, Manish Sisodia on bribes) discussing this? Will it be admissible? Isn't the statement (by an approver) hearsay? It is an inference but has to be based on evidence. In cross-examination, this will fall flat in two minutes," the bench said.

SC observation in 5 points

1. You (probe agency) have to establish a chain. The money has to flow from the liquor lobby to the person. We agree with you that it's difficult to establish the chain because everything is done under wraps. But that's where your competence comes in.
2. You have taken two figures - ₹ 100 crore and ₹ 30 crore. Who paid them (accused) this? There can be so many people paying the money, not necessarily connected to the liquor policy.
3. Where is the proof? Dinesh Arora (businessman) himself is the recipient. Where is the evidence? Except for statement of Dinesh Arora, is there any other evidence? The chain is not fully established.
4. We understand that there was a policy change. Everyone will support policies that are good for businesses. Pressure groups are always there. Policy changes, even if wrong, without a money consideration will not matter. It's the money part that makes it an offence.
5. Manish Sisodia is not involved in all this. Vijay Nair (AAP communication chief and businessman) is there, but Manish Sisodia is not in this part. How will you bring him under the money laundering act? The money is not going to him. In case it is a company with whom he is involved, then we have vicarious liability. Otherwise, the prosecution falters. Money laundering is entirely a different offence.