Last Updated:
In its discharge order, the court held that there were large gaps, contradictions, and statements that were not based on independent evidence in the chargesheet filed by the CBI
AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal and party leader Manish Sisodia celebrate with family members after a Delhi court discharged them in an excise policy-related corruption case. (PTI)
In a significant reprieve to the leadership of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), the Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi has discharged all 23 accused in the Delhi excise policy case, including former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and his deputy Manish Sisodia. The court observed that the chargesheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was “tainted” and lacked “prima facie” evidence to support the prosecution.
Special Judge Jitendra Singh observed that there was “no overarching conspiracy or criminal intent” in the design and implementation of the widely criticised liquor excise policy, and that the CBI case was based on “speculation and not grounded in concrete facts.” The judge also pointed out the inconsistencies, hearsay, and deficiencies in the investigation conducted by the CBI.
Although the development has been a morale booster for the AAP leadership, it has also thrown up an important question— what about the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) money laundering case in the scam?
THE EXCISE POLICY CASE
The case dates back to a 2022 FIR filed by the CBI based on a complaint from the Delhi Chief Secretary regarding procedural irregularities and potential loss of funds in the formulation of the 2021-22 Delhi excise policy. There were reports of the policy being drafted in favour of certain private liquor licensees and of kickbacks being paid to political persons.
The CBI suspected the policy of being drafted in a manner that gave unfair advantages, such as lower fees and exemptions, which led to charges of corruption and loss of funds. There was also a point where the CBI suspected a payment of Rs 100 crore from third parties to influence the policy. This was investigated simultaneously by the Enforcement Directorate for money laundering.
Sisodia, who was handling the excise department when the policy was formulated, was arrested by the CBI in early 2023. Kejriwal was subsequently arrested in connection with the ED case investigating money laundering, which was allegedly linked to the same excise policy.
WHY DID THE COURT DROP THE CBI CASE?
In its discharge order, the court held that there were large gaps, contradictions, and statements that were not based on independent evidence in the chargesheet filed by the CBI.
First of all, there was no prima facie case made out against Kejriwal or Sisodia, which means that the court did not find sufficient credible material to warrant a trial. The court also held that the prosecution case was based on assumptions and statements of witnesses that did not hold water. In addition to this, the court was critical of the use of approver evidence, which means that the accused was given immunity in exchange for his testimony. In fact, in some statements, the court recommended a departmental inquiry against the CBI officials for their poor investigation.
WHAT DID KEJRIWAL SAY AFTER VERDICT?
Addressing the media, Kejriwal said: “I challenge Modi ji to hold elections in Delhi again. I can say with full confidence that if they get more than 10 seats, I will leave politics.”
The former chief minister, explaining why he chose to remain silent, said: “People kept asking where I had gone. I decided to keep quiet until the truth came out. Our families suffered a lot during this period.”
Kejriwal also alleged a political conspiracy against the Aam Aadmi Party, accusing PM Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah of trying to dismantle the party. “Two people hatched this conspiracy to finish AAP. Today, they should apologise to the country. I have earned honesty, not money,” he said.
WHAT HAPPENS TO THE ED CASE NOW?
As reported by The Indian Express, “Typically, an ED money laundering case is based on a ‘predicate offence’—the crime that allegedly produced the proceeds of crime. Lawyers say that often, if the predicate offence is struck down or the accused are acquitted, the case against them in money laundering may fall apart because there would be no ‘illegal origin’ of the money.”
But the government’s agencies have indicated that they may appeal the discharge decision in higher courts, including the Delhi High Court. If the appeal is accepted and the trial continues or if the discharge is stayed, the fate of the ED case may shift. Also, the independent audits and assembly reports pointing to the loss of revenue have added to the legal complexities of the case.
WHAT NEXT?
The CBI is likely to appeal the judgment of the trial court in the Delhi High Court, which means that the legal fight is far from over. Additionally, the ED case of money laundering is still pending, although its viability may depend on the outcome of the appeal of the predicate excise case.
Politically, the judgment of the court is being seen as a huge vindication of the Aam Aadmi Party, although its opponents may use the pending ED case or the audit reports to keep the heat on.
February 27, 2026, 18:14 IST
Read More
