Court discharges all 23 accused in Delhi excise policy case, raps CBI probe

A Delhi court on Thursday discharged all twenty three accused in CBI Case No. 56/2022 including former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and deputy CM Manish Sisodia arising out of the Delhi Excise Policy 2021 to 2022, holding that the prosecution failed to establish even a prima facie case to proceed to trial.

In a 549 page order, Special Judge Jitendra Singh said the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had not produced material sufficient to raise the grave suspicion required for framing of charges. The court described the prosecution’s case as resting on conjecture and surmise and found that the core allegations did not withstand judicial scrutiny.

The court held that the Excise Policy was formulated through a consultative process and moved through established constitutional channels. The record showed that suggestions from the Lieutenant Governor were sought, examined and incorporated, and that the proposal was processed in accordance with the Transaction of Business Rules. In these circumstances, the allegation of a unilateral conspiracy by the political executive was found to be inconsistent with the documentary trail.

Addressing the allegation that an upfront bribe of Rs 100 crore was paid and was to be recovered through inflated wholesale margins, the court said the theory was unsupported by evidence. It noted that the uniform 12 percent wholesale margin was commercially inadequate, particularly for high volume products such as beer, and did not demonstrate assured excess profits. 

The judge further held that the alleged money trail, based on pauti entries attributed to Angadiya firms, was inadmissible in law. Citing the principles laid down in the V C Shukla case, the court said loose and detachable sheets cannot be treated as books of account and cannot by themselves fasten criminal liability.

The order also recorded concern over the manner of investigation, noting that approver statements were re recorded multiple times. 

The court observed that the statement of a tainted witness, motivated by the prospect of pardon, cannot in the absence of credible corroboration justify subjecting an accused to a criminal trial. 

It found no material to show demand or acceptance of illegal gratification by public servants and said the licensing process followed notified eligibility criteria. In one instance, the court recommended consideration of departmental action against the investigating officer for arraigning a public servant without supporting material.

Concluding that the prosecution had attempted to criminalise policy decisions and administrative discretion without proof of mens rea or quid pro quo, the court held that the guarantee of a fair trial under Article 21 requires that criminal charges be founded on legally admissible evidence. 

Apart from Kejriwal and Sisodia the other accused in the case were Satyendar Jain and Durgesh Pathak, along with excise officials Kuldeep Singh and Narender Singh. 

Also named were Vijay Nair, Abhishek Boinpally, Arun Ramchandra Pillai, Mootha Goutam, Sameer Mahendru, Amandeep Singh Dhall, Arjun Pandey, Butchibabu Gorantla, Rajesh Joshi, Damodar Prasad Sharma, Prince Kumar, Arvind Kumar Singh, Chanpreet Singh Rayat, Kavitha Kalvakuntla also known as K Kavitha, Amit Arora, Vinod Chauhan, Ashish Chand Mathur and Sarath Chandra Reddy.