Liquor policy case: Delhi high court says factual discrepancies cited by trial court while discharging Arvind Kejriwal seem erroneous

NEW DELHI: The Delhi HC on Monday said that a special court's observations made against witnesses and approvers in the liquor policy case while discharging ex-CM Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and others appear "prima facie erroneous".

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, admitting the CBI's revision plea, has sought responses from the 23 accused discharged in the case.





The court has also stayed the special court judge's sharp criticism of the CBI's lead investigating officer in the liquor policy case.

Justice Sharma said she is "of the opinion that certain factual discrepancies pointed out in the impugned order, the observations made by the trial court regarding statements of the witnesses and the approvers, at the stage of charge itself, prima facie appear erroneous, and need consideration when viewed in the background of well-settled law on charge and conspiracy, as to whether such observations could have been made at the stage of charge itself."

The HC has also summoned the trial-court records of the case and postponed the ED's money-laundering case, connected to the liquor policy case, pending before the same trial court till CBI revision plea is decided.

Posting the CBI's plea for further hearing on March 16, Justice Sharma pointed out that despite advance notice, none of the 23 persons (or their lawyers) appeared.

On the strictures passed by the special judge against CBI’s lead investigator, the high court observed that “...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.”

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the CBI, argued that since all the accused persons were discharged and observations were also made with regard to the case filed by ED, the HC should ensure that the case filed under the provisions of PMLA, 2002 was not affected by virtue of this order.

In its 5 page order, Justice Sharma recorded the stand of CBI that the trial court ignored crucial and admissible evidence at the stage of charge itself, ignoring that it was to only take a prima facie view of evidence collected at the stage of charge, and instead conducted a full-fledged trial.

On February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia, Telangana Jagruthi president K Kavitha and 20 others, pulling up the CBI by saying its case was wholly unable to survive judicial scrutiny and stood discredited in its entirety.

CBI has been probing alleged corruption in the formulation and execution of the erstwhile AAP government's now-scrapped excise policy.