loader image

Delhi HC Stays Trial Court’s Adverse Remarks Against CBI in Excise Policy Case; Issues Notice to Kejriwal & Sisodia

Delhi HC Stays Trial Court’s Adverse Remarks Against CBI in Excise Policy Case; Issues Notice to Kejriwal & Sisodia

Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement [Order dated March 09, 2026]

Delhi High Court excise policy

The Delhi High Court on Monday stayed the operation of adverse remarks made by the trial court against the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and its investigating officer in the Delhi excise policy case, while issuing notice to the accused on the CBI’s petition challenging the discharge of Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia.

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CBI, argued that the discharge order was legally flawed and ignored substantial evidence collected during the investigation.

“This is an order of acquittal without trial. It is as bad as that. It may sound like an overstatement but it is actually an understatement,” Mr Mehta submitted before the court.

He described the matter as “one of the biggest scams in the history of the capital of this nation” and said the agency had conducted a “meticulous scientific investigation,” relying on emails, WhatsApp chats, financial records and statements recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC.

According to the prosecution, bribes ranging from ₹19 crore to ₹100 crore were allegedly paid in exchange for policy favours. Mr Mehta said ₹44.5 crore was routed through hawala channels and used to fund elections in Goa.

The Solicitor General also contended that the trial court wrongly discounted statements of approvers at the stage of framing charges. “Approver statements do not need corroboration till the stage of trial,” he argued, adding that witnesses could be tested through cross-examination during trial.

Mr Mehta further told the court that evidence such as digital notes recovered from the accused’s mobile phones and instances of destruction of around 170 phones had been ignored by the trial court while granting discharge.

Noting that no counsel appeared for the accused despite advance notice, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said the court would stay the remarks made against the investigating agency and directed that proceedings in the related PMLA case be deferred to a date after the High Court hearing. Notice has been issued to the respondents.