NEW DELHI: While dismissing former deputy chief minister
Manish Sisodia
’s second
bail plea
, a court rejected his contention that the proceedings in the
money laundering case
linked to the alleged
liquor policy scam
have been delayed or that the case is proceeding at a snail’s pace. The so-called delay, the court of special judge Kaveri Baweja opined, could clearly be attributable to Sisodia himself.
“It is apparent that the applicant, individually and along with different accused, has been filing one or other application/making oral submissions frequently, some of them frivolous, that too on a piecemeal basis, apparently as a concerted effort for accomplishing the shared purpose of causing delay in the matter,” the judge said in the 42-page order issued on Tuesday while pronouncing that “the argument of the applicant that he has not contributed to the delay in proceedings or that the case has been proceeding at a snail’s pace, therefore, cannot be accepted”.
Sisodia stated that the prosecution had assured the Supreme Court last year that the trial would conclude in six-eight months, and he was entitled to seek bail as per the apex court’s Oct 30, 2023 order if the trial was protracted and proceeded at a snail’s pace in the next three months.
The court, however, said the steady progression of the case, despite the apparent attempts to slow down its progress, couldn’t by any standard be equated with a snail’s pace. “The so-called delay caused in the progression of the case is also clearly on account of reasons attributable to the applicant,” stated the order, which was made available on Wednesday.
The court also rejected Sisodia’s argument seeking parity with co-accused Benoy Babu, who was released after 13 months in jail, saying there was a difference in the nature of allegations against them.
Rejecting Sisodia’s contention that he should be released on bail because of the health condition of his wife, the court said his plea did not cite any medical emergency or urgent medical condition warranting his release. “The applicant in his application has mentioned that there is nobody in the family except him to support her (wife). However, this is factually incorrect as the applicant has a son who can take care of the applicant’s wife,” the judge said.
“Even otherwise, from the medical record of the wife of the applicant as annexed with the application under consideration, it appears that she has been suffering from the said ailment for a long time and has also been receiving requisite medical treatment and care for the same. The application discloses no imminent or urgent need or any medical emergency warranting the release of the accused/applicant on bail for this reason,” the court noted.
Meanwhile, the court also listed 135 applications filed by different accused since April 2023 for various reasons, including requests to seek documents relied on by the prosecution, CCTV recordings of their custodial interrogation, and a request for interim bail.
