Decision on Sisodia's bail not taken today, next hearing on October 12

Delhi Liquor Scam Case: A decision could not be taken today on the bail plea of former Delhi Deputy CM Manish Sisodia, who is in jail in the Delhi Liquor Scam case. The Supreme Court has now given the date of October 12 to hear this case. In this, arguments from ED will be heard. Earlier, during the cross-examination of the case, the Supreme Court raised many questions on ED. Justice Sanjeev Khanna asked how will the government witness be believed.

Former Delhi Deputy CM Manish Sisodia is in jail in the Delhi liquor scam case, he was arrested by ED in February this year. A day earlier, during the hearing on his bail plea, the Supreme Court had asked the ED that when the political party benefited, then why was it not made an accused. One day was given to reply. When the hearing of the case started on Thursday, the Supreme Court once again raised many questions on the ED.

Supreme Court asked these questions

During the hearing of the case, Manish Sisodia's lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi gave arguments, he gave details of several arrests made in the cases registered by CBI and ED and the bail granted to some of the accused. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court asked the ED that if Manish Sisodia had no role in the money trail, then why was he made an accused in money laundering? The Supreme Court asked whether the agency had seen the discussion between the government witness and Manish Sisodia? Will the statement of a government witness be admissible in law? The court also asked whether this is not a hearsay thing? The Supreme Court further said that everything should be based on evidence, otherwise the case will fall in cross-examination within two minutes.

No relation to Vijay Nair

In the Supreme Court, Manish Sisodia's advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that Sisodia had no relation with Vijay Nair and he was a party volunteer who used to report to other leaders. Whatever allegations have been made are based on hearsay, there is no concrete evidence to prove them, the statements due to which a case is being claimed against Sisodia are themselves contradictory.

Conspiracy to earn money

During the hearing in the Supreme Court, ED's lawyer ASG SV Raju argued that a conspiracy was hatched to earn money under the policy. On one hand money was taken and on the other hand discounts were provided. When Justice Khanna asked ED that if the policy decision was motivated for personal gain then are you challenging the policy decision. On this, ASG Raju, on behalf of ED, argued that we say that the policy was made to benefit the wholesalers.

Suggestion mails were copy paste

During the hearing, the Supreme Court asked the ED that if the leaders think that the policy should be like this, they give statements and take feedback, then what is wrong in it? On this, ED argued that the mails received for public opinion were all similar, they looked like copy paste, the petitioner wanted increase in license, reduction in excise, he wanted auction system and not lottery system. Was. On this, Justice Sanjeev Khanna said that the court has accepted that the auction system is a better system. Later the ED gave the date of next hearing of the case as October 12.