Delhi HC Notifies ED on AAP Leader’s Bail Plea in Excise Policy PMLA Case

The Delhi High Court has issued a notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in response to a regular bail plea filed by Sanjay Singh, a senior leader of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), in connection with a money laundering case related to an alleged Delhi excise policy scam. Sanjay Singh was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate on October 4, 2023.

Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma, presiding over the case, has scheduled the next hearing for January 29, 2023, while awaiting a response from the ED. In his plea, Sanjay Singh asserted that he is neither an accused nor a suspect in a scheduled or predicate offense investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). He emphasized that despite three charge-sheets being filed since August 17, 2022, no evidence has been presented against him.

Sanjay Singh’s bail plea contends that he is innocent of any criminal wrongdoing or violation of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). He maintains that his life and liberty should be protected from unjustified encroachment based on what he alleges is a false, malicious, and motivated case lacking merit.

Earlier, on December 22, 2023, the trial court rejected Sanjay Singh’s bail application, expressing a prima facie view that the case against him is genuine. The court stated that there are reasonable grounds to believe in his involvement in the alleged money laundering offense connected to the excise policy scam.

The court also highlighted that the ED’s case, as per the ECIR (Enforcement Case Information Report), had received approval from the Supreme Court in the context of bribes related to the formulation of the Delhi excise policy. The judge mentioned that bail applications of other accused in the case had been dismissed, and the legal positions stated in those decisions had not been overturned.

Addressing Sanjay Singh’s counsel’s arguments, the court rejected claims that no recovery of the alleged amount had been made from him, emphasizing that such recovery is not always necessary. The court also dismissed arguments regarding the lack of documentary evidence showing a trail connecting Sanjay Singh to the alleged proceeds of crime, noting that transactions were conducted in cash.

Additionally, the court rejected assertions that statements of the approver should not be considered due to alleged coercion from ED officials, stating that there is no evidence of such coercion. The court emphasized that evidence and material collected by the ED, along with the alleged attempt to influence the excise policy formulation, provide grounds for denying bail.

In conclusion, the court noted allegations that Sanjay Singh played a role in formulating the excise policy for the year 2020-21 and attempted to generate proceeds of crime through various activities, including an unsigned MoU. The court set out these details from statements of the approver and other accused, emphasizing that the alleged actions were done at the instance of Sanjay Singh.