+
  • HOME»
  • SC adjourns hearing on Sanjay Singh’s plea challenging arrest till Mar 5

SC adjourns hearing on Sanjay Singh’s plea challenging arrest till Mar 5

The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned the hearing till March 5 on AAP leader Sanjay Singh’s plea against the Delhi High Court order that rejected his petition challenging his remand and arrest in the alleged liquor irregularities case. A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta adjourned the matter for further hearing on March […]

The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned the hearing till March 5 on AAP leader Sanjay Singh’s plea against the Delhi High Court order that rejected his petition challenging his remand and arrest in the alleged liquor irregularities case.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta adjourned the matter for further hearing on March 5, 2024.

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the Enforcement Directorate (ED), informed the court that the Delhi High Court has reserved the order on regular bail and sought adjournment.

Recently, the Delhi High Court rejected Singh’s plea challenging his remand and arrest in the said case. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had arrested Sanjay Singh on October 4, 2023, following a day-long questioning at his residence in Delhi. The ED claimed that Singh and his associates played a role in the Delhi government’s decision to grant licenses to alcohol shops and merchants in 2020, causing losses to the state exchequer and violating anti-corruption laws.

The ED had conducted searches at various locations, including the homes and offices of Sanjay Singh’s close associate Ajit Tyagi, and other contractors and businessmen who allegedly benefited from the policy. In its nearly 270-page supplementary charge sheet, the ED labeled Sisodia as a key conspirator in the case.

The Delhi liquor scam case, also known as the excise policy case, revolves around allegations that the Arvind Kejriwal-led Delhi government’s excise policy for 2021-22 allowed cartelization and favored certain dealers who had purportedly paid bribes for it—a charge vehemently refuted by the AAP.

ED filed its first chargesheet in the case last year. The agency said it has so far undertaken over 200 search operations in this case after filing an FIR after taking cognisance of a CBI case that was registered on the recommendation of the Delhi lieutenant governor.
The CBI inquiry was recommended based on the findings of the Delhi chief secretary’s report filed in July showing prima facie violations of the GNCTD Act 1991, Transaction of Business Rules (ToBR)-1993, Delhi Excise Act-2009, and Delhi Excise Rules-2010.

Tags:

Advertisement