SC to hear Sisodia's plea seeking relaxation of bail conditions

New Delhi : The Supreme Court on Monday said it would hear on December 11 AAP leader Manish Sisodia's pleas seeking relaxation of bail conditions which require him to report to the investigating officer twice a week in the corruption and money laundering cases related to the Delhi excise policy.

Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Sisodia, mentioned the matter before a bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan. "Day after tomorrow," the bench said, while agreeing to list the matter on December 11.

The apex court on November 22 agreed to hear Sisodia's pleas and issued notices to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) seeking their responses on the applications. On August 9, the apex court had granted him bail in the corruption and money laundering cases linked to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam, saying long incarceration for 17 months without trial had deprived him of his right to speedy trial.

The apex court had imposed conditions, including that he shall report to the investigating officer on every Monday and Thursday between 10 and 11 am. During the hearing on November 22, Singhvi had said the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader had appeared before the investigating officers 60 times.

The former Delhi deputy chief minister was arrested by both the CBI and the ED in corruption and money laundering cases linked to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. He was arrested by the CBI on February 26, 2023 for purported irregularities in the formulation and implementation of the now scrapped Delhi excise policy 2021-22. The following month, the ED arrested him in the money laundering case stemming from the CBI FIR on March 9, 2023. He resigned from the Delhi cabinet on February 28, 2023. Sisodia has denied the allegations.

In its August 9 verdict granting bail to Sisodia in both the cases, the apex court had said it was high time that the trial courts and the high courts should recognise the principle that "bail is rule and jail is exception". "We find that, on account of a long period of incarceration running for around 17 months and the trial even not having been commenced, the appellant (Sisodia) has been deprived of his right to speedy trial," it had said.