The Delhi High Court on Monday observed that some of the observations made by the trial court while discharging Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, K Kavitha and 20 others in the Delhi excise policy case were "erroneous". .Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma gave a prima facie finding that the observations made by the trial court regarding statements of the witnesses and the approvers appear to be erroneous at the stage of framing of the charge. They require consideration when viewed in the background of the law on charge and conspiracy, the Court said. Further, the Court also said that the trial court's scathing observations against the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) officer who investigated the case are also "foundationally misconceived". "As far as the argument regarding stay of the remarks made qua the investigating officer of the case is concerned, this Court takes note of the fact that such scathing remarks recorded in the impugned order, and the reasons given for passing such remarks including, concluding that the investigating officer has abused his official position to conduct unfair investigation, are prima facie foundationally misconceived especially when made at the stage of charge itself," the Court observed. .Justice Sharma made these observations in a detailed order passed on Monday while staying the trial court's directions for departmental proceedings against the CBI officer who investigated the case.The High Court also asked the trial court to defer the proceedings in the money laundering case connected to the same matter..Special judge Jitendra Singh had on February 27 discharged all the accused in the CBI case, holding that the prosecution case does not survive judicial scrutiny as the CBI had tried to construct a narrative of conspiracy on the basis of mere conjecture.Hence, the trial court ruled that the case did not merit a trial.The case arose in 2022 when the CBI registered a First Information Report (FIR) alleging that the Delhi Excise Policy of 2021-22 was manipulated to facilitate monopolisation and cartelisation of liquor trade in Delhi..The special court pulled up the CBI for building its case through approver statements."If such conduct is allowed, it would be a grave violation of the Constitutional principles. The conduct where an accused is granted pardon and then made an approver, his statements used to fill the gaps in the investigation/narrative and make additional people accused is wrong," the judge said.It had also ordered departmental proceedings against the investigating officer for the way he conducted the probe..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.
