Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh moved the Delhi High Court wherein challenging his arrest by and remand to the Enforcement Directorate in the money laundering case which relates to the liquor policy scam. The Division bench comprising of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula was hearing the present matter.
The matter was mentioned for urgent listing by lawyer appearing for Singh. The counsel appearing for Singh argued before the court that the arrest is being challenged as the grounds of arrest were not given to Singh by the probe agency.
In the said case, Singh being in the ED custody which expired on October 13, 2023 and he will be produced before Special Judge MK Nagpal of Rouse Avenue Court today at 2 PM.
The court arrested the AAP leader on October 04 by the Enforcement Directorate. Thus, this was after the searches were being conducted at his residence in the national capital. Singh is the third AAP leader who is to be arrested in the said matter.
The court remanded him to five days of ED custody which was later extended by three days more. Therefore, raids were being conducted by the Enforcement Directorate, ED at the residence of Singh’s after he was named by businessman Dinesh Arora, who being the accused in the case and later turned approver in both the ED and CBI cases.
It has also been alleged by the ED that an employee of Dinesh Arora delivered Rs. 2 crores to Sanjay Singh’s house on two occasions and the said agency has to confront the AAP leader with digital evidence.
Further, the ED in the case alleged that the excise policy was being implemented as part of a conspiracy to give wholesale business profit of 12% to certain private companies. It has also been stated that such a stipulation was not mentioned in the minutes of meetings of Group of Ministers, GoM.
The said agency also alleged before the court that there was a conspiracy which was coordinated by Vijay Nair and other individuals along with South Group in order to give extraordinary profit margin to wholesalers. Adding to it, it was contended before the court that Nair was acting on behalf of Sisodia.