The Delhi High Court has deferred its decision on the bail plea filed by AAP MP Sanjay Singh, who is currently under arrest in connection with a money laundering case related to the Delhi excise policy scam.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma presided over the proceedings, hearing arguments presented by Singh and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Singh, who has been in custody for the past three months, sought bail on the grounds that he has not been implicated in the predicate offense. The ED, however, opposed the bail plea, alleging Singh’s involvement in various aspects of the Delhi liquor scam related to the 2021-22 policy period.
Representing the ED, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju argued that Singh posed a flight risk, alleging witness intimidation to obstruct the truth from emerging. Raju contended that Singh, having gained access to certain confidential documents within the ED office, had the potential to commit similar offenses again.
In response, Singh’s advocate, Mohit Mathur, highlighted that his client’s arrest was based on the statement of the ED’s “star witness,” Dinesh Arora, and emphasized Singh’s absence from the main FIR filed by the CBI.
The ED, in its reply, claimed that Singh played a crucial role in creating a special purpose vehicle (M/s Aralias Hospitality Pvt Ltd) to launder proceeds of crime arising from changes in Delhi’s excise policy. The agency further alleged that Singh, closely associated with businessmen Dinesh Arora and Amit Arora, received illegal funds and kickbacks amounting to Rs 2 crore.
The ED contended that Singh, as a key conspirator, facilitated the now-scrapped excise policy’s formulation and implementation, benefiting specific liquor entities for financial gain.
The case revolves around corruption allegations in the formulation and execution of the city government’s excise policy for 2021-22, leading to the registration of an FIR by the CBI.
The trial court, in denying bail, affirmed Singh’s connection to the “proceeds of crime” and deemed the case against him as genuine, referencing Supreme Court approval of the ED’s basic case.
(With PTI inputs)
