Absence of Videography Alone Not Sufficient For Bail When Custody is Less Than a Year: Delhi High Court Refuses Bail in Commercial Quantity Heroin Use of Permitted Synthetic Colour in Dal Masur Still Constitutes Adulteration: Punjab & Haryana High Court Uphold Conviction Penalty Must Not Result in Civil Death of Professionals: Delhi High Court Reduces Two-Year Suspension of Insolvency Professional, Citing Disproportionate Punishment Right of Cross-Examination is Statutory, Cannot Be Denied When Documents Are Exhibited Later: Chhattisgarh High Court Allows Re-Cross-Examination Compounding after Adjudication is Impermissible under FEMA: Calcutta High Court Declines Post-Adjudication Compounding Plea Tears of a Child Speak Louder Than Words: Bombay HC Confirms Life Term for Man Who Raped 4-Year-Old Alleged Dowry Death After Forced Remarriage: Allahabad High Court Finds No Evidence of Strangulation or Demand “Even If Executant Has No Title, Registrar Must Register the Document If Formalities Are Met” — Supreme Court  Declares Tamil Nadu's Rule 55A(i) Ultra Vires the Registration Act, 1908 Res Judicata Is Not Optional – It’s Public Policy: Supreme Court Slams SEBI for Passing Second Final Order in Fraud Case Against Vital Communications Ltd A Person Has Died… Insurance Company Cannot Escape Liability Without Proving Policy Violation: Supreme Court Slams High Court for Exonerating Insurer in Fatal Accident Case Calling Someone by Caste Name Is Not Enough – It Must Be Publicly Done to Attract SC/ST Act: Supreme Court Acquits All in Jharkhand Land Dispute Case Broken Promises Don’t Make Rape – Mature Adults in Long-Term Relationships Must Accept Responsibility: Supreme Court Quashes Rape Case Against NRI Man Every Broken Relationship Can’t Be Branded Rape: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Retired Judge Accused of Sexual Exploitation on Promise of Marriage No Evidence, No Motive, Not Even Proof of Murder: Supreme Court Slams Conviction, Acquits Man Accused of Killing Wife After Two Years of Marriage You Can’t Assume Silence Is Consent: Supreme Court Sends Back ₹46 Lakh Insurance Dispute to NCDRC for Fresh Determination “Voyage Must Start and End Before Monsoon Sets In — But What If That’s Practically Impossible?” SC Rules Against Insurance Company in Shipping Dispute No Criminal Case Can Be Built on a Land Deal That’s Three Decades Old Without Specific Allegations: Supreme Court Upholds Quashing of FIR Against Ex-JK Housing Chief Just Giving a Call for Protest Doesn’t Make One Criminally Liable - Rail Roko Protest Quashed Against KCR Ex-CM: Telangana High Court Ends 13-Year-Old Proceedings for 2011 Telangana Agitation This Is Not a Case of Greed Simplicitor but a Celebration of Fraud: Karnataka High Court Grants Specific Performance, Slams Vendor for Violating Court Orders Limitation Period Under Section 18-A of Rent Act Mandatory, Delay Not Condonable – Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds NRI Landlord's Eviction Against Tenant Custom Department Cannot Revive Time-Barred Show Cause Notices After Seven Years Without Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Notices to JBS Exports Public Property Cannot Be Managed Privately for Decades — Fair Price Shops in Hospitals Must Be Allotted by Auction: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Registered Sale Deed Alone Does Not Dismantle Prior Security Interest: Gauhati High Court Rejects Buyer’s Writ Against SARFAESI Action, Cites Expanded Statutory Definition Old OBC Certificates Won’t Work — Supreme Court Says Cut-Off Date Is Final in Rajasthan Civil Judge Exams

Supreme Court Denies Bail to Former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia in Corruption and Money Laundering Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 30 October 2023, the Supreme Court of India has denied bail to former Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi, Manish Sisodia, in a highly significant corruption and money laundering case. The decision comes following an exhaustive examination of Sisodia's bail application, which involved a thorough analysis of various legal issues and allegations.

Sisodia's plea for bail revolved around allegations under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. These charges were brought against him based on two chargesheets filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation and a criminal complaint lodged by the Directorate of Enforcement.

The case raised complex legal questions, including constitutional protection under Articles 74 and 163, the interpretation of Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, and the conditions for prosecution under the PML Act.

One of the primary allegations against Sisodia pertained to a conspiracy related to a new excise policy, with accusations of kickbacks totaling an astounding Rs. 100 Crores, purportedly used in election campaigns. Additionally, claims of money laundering have been made in connection with these allegations.

The court conducted an extensive examination of the evidence, including statements from co-accused and other witnesses, documentary evidence, and contradictions therein. The case involved an alleged involvement of middlemen and Sisodia's purported influence in the granting of a wholesale license to Indo Spirit.

Sisodia's defense vehemently denied the allegations, pointing to a lack of concrete evidence linking him to the alleged crimes. He consistently maintained that he had no involvement in the illicit transactions and activities in question.

Counter-arguments presented by the CBI and the Directorate of Enforcement reiterated claims of conspiracy, evidence showing the money trail, and allegations of evidence destruction by Sisodia. Concerns were raised about his potential influence over ongoing investigations and the trial.

One of the significant challenges in this case is the anticipation of a lengthy trial due to the voluminous evidence and numerous legal issues raised. Despite the gravity of the charges, the court expressed concerns over prolonged incarceration, emphasizing the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.

In the judgment, the court delved into the interpretation of Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, emphasizing that bail applications are not meant to determine guilt but to assess broad probabilities. The court's role is to make a tentative finding based on available evidence without prejudicing the merits of the case during the trial.

The judgment also scrutinized the allegation of a bribe payment of Rs. 2,20,00,000 to Sisodia, which was not included in the CBI's chargesheet, making it challenging to regard as 'proceeds of crime' under the PML Act.

Despite these legal complexities, the court's decision to deny bail underscores the seriousness of the charges and the need to secure the accused's presence for trial. However, the court has provided the liberty to Manish Sisodia to seek bail afresh in case of changed circumstances or protracted trial, reflecting its commitment to upholding constitutional mandates while ensuring law enforcement.

The appeals have been dismissed with a clarifying note that the observations made in the judgment are for the disposal purposes of the present appeals and are not intended to influence the trial court's proceedings on the merits of the case. This ensures adherence to legal protocols and a fair evaluation of evidence in the subsequent trial.

The case has garnered significant attention due to its political implications and the involvement of a prominent figure like Manish Sisodia. It is expected that the legal proceedings will continue to be closely watched as the trial progresses.

Date of Decision: October 30, 2023

MANISH SISODIA VS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

 

Similar News