In a Delhi court hearing on Saturday, it was alleged that.
Prosecutors for the Enforcement Directorate (ED), led by Zoheb Hossain, argued against Manish Sisodia’s bail plea in court today. The hearing took place before Special Judge Kaveri Baweja at the Rouse Avenue Courts.
The prosecution claimed the 31 accused flooded the court with 95 applications in the last few weeks, suggesting a deliberate attempt to stall the trial.
The prosecutor (Hossain) argued that any delays are entirely the fault of the defendants, not the prosecution. He highlighted the large number of applications filed by the accused (95 in total), some repetitive and others piecemeal. Even one defendant (Sisodia) filed six applications on his own. Hossain emphasizes that these “frivolous applications” are a major reason for the lengthy proceedings.
The defense lawyer for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) accused the defendants of deliberately stalling the trial by filing a large number of applications. He argued that these delays were intentional, pointing out that the court previously noticed the late filing of some applications without any explanation. He contrasted this with the ED’s cooperation, highlighting their full participation for the past month, including document inspections that, according to him, were being done very slowly and without proper effort.
Sisodia has been in custody since February of last year. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) case against Sisodia and other Aam Aadmi Party leaders originated from a complaint registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in 2022 claiming there were improprieties in the formulation and execution of the Delhi Excise Policy of 2021-22.
- Despite previous rejections, he submitted new requests for bail to the trial court last month.
At least 16 individuals have been apprehended in the case thus far. Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha are among those currently imprisoned in connection with the case.
At the hearing, Hossain pointed out that the Supreme Court, while denying bail to Sisodia, did leave the door open for him to seek bail again based on the length of the trial. However, the court emphasized that delay is just one factor considered during the bail decision.
- Senior Advocate Mohit Mathur argued that the alleged scam caused no loss to the government coffers.”
- “Mathur said that the purported scam did not financially harm the public.”
Despite no harm to individuals and a reported increase in government revenue, I’ve been held for 13 months. Briefly granted bail, I followed all instructions. The ‘triple test’ for bail shouldn’t prevent my release. There’s no evidence I can tamper with witnesses or influence them. Any past authority I held is no longer relevant.
