New Delhi, Feb 27 (PTI) A Delhi court said on Friday that the evidence collected by the CBI during its probe into the liquor policy failed to disclose a prima-facie case of “policy concealment, unilateralism or exclusion of the constitutional authority”, while discharging former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia in the matter.
Special Judge Jitendra Singh was hearing the case against Sisodia, former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, Telangana Jagruthi president K Kavitha and 20 others, who were accused in the liquor-policy case filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
In a 598-page order, the court said, “The material, as it presently stands, does not disclose a prima-facie case of policy concealment, unilateralism or exclusion of the constitutional authority. On the contrary, the record reflects a process marked by consultation, communication and administrative caution.” According to the prosecution, Sisodia had ignored the Ravi Dhawan Committee report that had cited discrepancies in the excise policy.
The court said the policy was framed to overcome the challenges faced by the earlier excise policy, including refinement of distribution margins, reflecting attempts to address monopoly tendencies and regulatory leakages under the earlier regime.
It said the policy emerged during a period marked by unprecedented fiscal strain occasioned by the COVID-19 pandemic, when state revenues had suffered severe contraction owing to lockdown measures, while expenditure obligations expanded significantly to address public-health exigencies.
“The choice of an auction-based model, which ordinarily assures competitive bidding and potentially-enhanced revenue realisation, cannot be divorced from that fiscal context. Policy formulation must be appreciated as a response to the economic realities prevailing at the relevant time,” the court said.
It underlined that the prosecution did not allege that the bidding process of retail vends in Delhi was vitiated by manipulation, irregular evaluation or misconduct.
“There is no assertion that bids were unlawfully structured, that eligibility criteria were selectively relaxed or that the allocation process was procedurally compromised. The challenge is directed at the model itself, not at its implementation,” the court said.
It said at the present stage, it is concerned only with the question that whether the broad structural shift is prima facie an inference of criminality.
“On such limited scrutiny, no such inference arises merely from the fact of privatisation or the incorporation of new regulatory clauses,” the judge said.
He said the prosecution’s narrative of the policy being “suspicious” has collapsed under its own weight.
“Far from lending support to the theory of undue benefit to the so-called ‘South Group’, these provisions, when examined in their correct regulatory context, affirm the defence case that the DEP-21/22 was structured to disperse control, curb monopoly and promote a level-playing field,” the court said. PTI SKM MNR RC
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.