CBI opposes Sisodia’s interim bail plea over wife’s illness, says he suppressed fact she has been discharged from hospital

New Delhi, May 4 (PTI) The CBI Thursday opposed a plea by former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia seeking interim bail in the Delhi excise policy case to take care of his ailing wife, claiming he suppressed the fact that she has already been discharged from hospital.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) said Sisodia’s wife has already been discharged from the hospital but this material fact was not mentioned in his interim bail plea. According to the discharge memo, it said, her condition has improved.

However, Sisodia’s counsel claimed there was no suppression of facts and the mentioning document placed before the court for urgent listing disclosed his wife has been discharged from the hospital but she needs constant care.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma orally said, “Every husband has a duty to take care of his wife.”

Senior advocate Mohit Mathur, appearing for Sisodia, hastened to add this is the vow taken at the time of solemnisation of marriage.

Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, representing the CBI, said in cases where the medical condition of someone remains bad, he will be the first person to say that relief should be granted.

“Here, on April 25, Sisodia’s wife was hospitalised after her conditioned worsened but she has been discharged much before filing of the interim bail application. The interim bail application has to go on the ground of suppression of facts itself.

“They have suppressed the fact that she has been discharged and her condition has improved. It was not an inadvertent error, this was deliberate,” the law officer contended.

As Sisodia’s counsel maintained there was no suppression of fact which was given in the mentioning memo, Raju wanted to know why was it not mentioned in the interim application. “We don’t get the mentioning memo,” he said.

The high court also heard part arguments of the CBI on Sisodia’s regular bail plea and listed the matter for further hearing on May 10.

Sisodia’s counsel had submitted on Wednesday that the medical condition of the senior AAP leader’s wife needs urgent attention, and urged the court to release him on interim bail.

The CBI had arrested Sisodia for alleged corruption in the formulation and implementation of the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22 on February 26, following several rounds of questioning.

On March 31, the trial court had dismissed Sisodia’s bail plea in the matter, saying he was “prima facie the architect” of the “scam” and had played the “most important and vital role” in the criminal conspiracy related to alleged payment of advance kickbacks of Rs 90-100 crore meant for him and his colleagues in the Delhi government.

The high court had earlier issued a notice and asked the CBI to file its reply to Sisodia’s regular bail plea. He has challenged the trial court’s order denying him bail in the case.

Sisodia’s counsel had earlier said the lower court has not considered the medical condition of the AAP leader’s wife, who is suffering from multiple sclerosis. He said the condition of Sisodia’s wife was deteriorating.

The lawyer had said the allegation that he was a recipient of the proceeds of crime was “all in air” and no money trail leading to him has been found.

Sisodia has sought parity for him with the other accused who have got the relief, and claimed that he was not in a position to influence the witnesses in the case or tamper with evidence.

The CBI has opposed his bail plea, saying that the excise policy was manipulated to favour cartelisation and monopolisation in liquor trade in the national capital, and Sisodia and businessman Vijay Nair are the main conspirators.

The CBI, in its written reply opposing Sisodia’s bail plea, claimed that the AAP leader was involved in commission of grave economic offences and was key to unravelling the modus operandi of the crime.

It said the bail plea was devoid of any merit and was an attempt to misuse the intricacies of law to thwart the progress of investigation in the case.