The Supreme Court heard two separate bail requests of former Delhi Deputy Chief and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Minister Manish Sisodia in the liquor policy case being probed by the CBI, and a money laundering case by the Enforcement Directorate.
Here’s a 5-point cheatsheet to this big story
You (probe agency) have to establish a chain. The money has to flow from the liquor lobby to the person. We agree with you that it’s difficult to establish the chain because everything is done under wraps. But that’s where your competence comes in.
You have taken two figures – Rs 100 crore and Rs 30 crore. Who paid them (accused) this? There can be so many people paying the money, not necessarily connected to the liquor policy.
Where is the proof? Dinesh Arora (businessman) himself is the recipient. Where is the evidence? Except for statement of Dinesh Arora, is there any other evidence? The chain is not fully established.
We understand that there was a policy change. Everyone will support policies that are good for businesses. Pressure groups are always there. Policy changes, even if wrong, without a money consideration will not matter. It’s the money part that makes it an offence.
Manish Sisodia is not involved in all this. Vijay Nair (AAP communication chief and businessman) is there, but Manish Sisodia is not in this part. How will you bring him under the money laundering act? The money is not going to him. In case it is a company with whom he is involved, then we have vicarious liability. Otherwise, the prosecution falters. Money laundering is entirely a different offence.
Post a comment