|
The Rouse Avenue Court is set to pronounce its order on the framing of charges in the Delhi Excise Policy corruption case on February 27.
Special Judge Jitendra Singh will pronounce the order in the case being probed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The court had earlier reserved its decision on February 12 after hearing detailed arguments from the CBI and the accused, including former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, along with 21 others. At the time the case was registered, Kejriwal was serving as Chief Minister and Sisodia as his deputy. The CBI filed its first chargesheet in 2022, followed by multiple supplementary chargesheets. The agency has alleged that Rs 100 crore was paid by a "south lobby" to influence the now-scrapped excise policy in its favour. In total, 23 accused have been chargesheeted, including Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, K Kavitha, Kuldeep Singh, Narender Singh, Vijay Nair, Abhishek Boinpally, Arun Ramchandra Pillai, Mootha Goutam, Sameer Mahendru, Amandeep Singh Dhall, Arjun Pandey, Butchibabu Gornatla, Rakesh Joshi, Damodar Prasad Sharma, Prince Kumar, Chanpreet Singh Rayat, Arvind Kumar Singh, Durgesh Pathak, Amit Arora, Vinod Chauhan, Ashish Mathur, and P Sarath Chadra Reddy. During arguments, the CBI maintained that the offence of criminal conspiracy must be viewed in its entirety and that the sufficiency of evidence should be tested during trial. Represented by Additional Solicitor General D P Singh and advocate Manu Mishra, the agency argued that there is adequate material to frame charges against all the accused. On the other hand, senior advocate N Hariharan, appearing for Kejriwal, contended that there is no incriminating material linking his client to the alleged conspiracy. He argued that the fourth supplementary chargesheet naming Kejriwal merely repackages earlier allegations and that Kejriwal was performing his official duties as Chief Minister. Hariharan further submitted that Kejriwal was not named in the initial chargesheet or in three earlier supplementary chargesheets. His name appeared only in the fourth. The defence also questioned the basis of further investigation and the evidentiary value of statements, including that of approver Raghav Magunta. The court's forthcoming order will determine whether charges are formally framed and the case proceeds to trial. (ANI)
|
