Liquor Policy Case: Supreme Court asks Manish Sisodia to go High Court to challenge plea against CBI arrest

New Delhi: Delhi Deputy CM Manish Sisodia moved the Supreme Court on Tuesday (February 28) for bail in the Excise Policy case. His petition was heard by a bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha. The court refused to hear the matter and asked Sisodia to approach the High Court. AAP leader Manish Sisodia is currently in CBI custody.

The CJI said that you are directly seeking bail and other relief from the Supreme Court. You cited Arnab Goswami and Vinod Dua case but he was completely different from this. You should take bail from the lower court, go to the high court to get the FIR quashed.

“Supreme Court cannot hear it directly”

Senior advocate AM Singhvi, appearing for Sisodia, said that let me speak for only 3 minutes. I (Sisodia) was called for questioning only twice. Before the arrest, the decision of the Supreme Court in the Arnesh Kumar case was not followed. Neither I am accused of tampering with the evidence, nor was there a possibility of my escape. The CJI said that these things may be true, but the Supreme Court cannot hear it directly.

“Go to the High Court, we will not listen”

Justice Narasimha said that the matter is of Delhi, it does not mean that you should directly come to the Supreme Court. Singhvi said that the Supreme Court is the guardian of fundamental rights. The CJI asked in which section the case is. Singhvi told that it is under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The CJI said that whatever you are saying, tell it to the High Court. We will not listen.

On the decision of the Supreme Court, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) said that we respect the court. We will go to the High Court. Manish Sisodia, who was arrested for alleged corruption in excise policy, was sent to CBI custody for five days on Monday by a special court in Delhi. The Court had said that for a proper and fair investigation, it is necessary to get proper and valid answers to the questions put to them and in the opinion of this Court, this is possible only through custodial interrogation of the accused.