 "10 reasons Supreme Court gave for granting bail to Manish Sisodia")
The Supreme Court on Friday granted bail to former Delhi deputy chief minister and Aam Aadmi Party leader Manish Sisodia in connection with the liquor policy case. The apex court’s decision came as a response to the prolonged detention of Sisodia highlighting the delay in the commencement of the trial and emphasised the constitutional right to a speedy trial as guaranteed by Article 21.
With nearly 495 witnesses and an overwhelming volume of documents yet to be examined, the Supreme Court recognised that there was no foreseeable conclusion to the trial in the near future. Consequently, the bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan allowed Sisodia’s bail plea underscoring the necessity to balance the seriousness of the charges with the fundamental rights of the accused.
Here are 10 key points from the Supreme Court decision granting bail to Sisodia in the liquor policy case:
1. Supreme Court grants bail
The Supreme Court allowed the bail plea of Sisodia, who has been in custody for 17 months in the liquor policy case, citing the delay in trial proceedings.
2. Right to speedy trial
The Supreme Court emphasised the constitutional right to a speedy trial noting that the prolonged incarceration without trial commencement violates Article 21, which guarantees personal liberty.
3. Unlikely trial conclusion
With approximately 495 witnesses and thousands of documents to be reviewed, the Supreme Court acknowledged that completing the trial in the near future was improbable.
4. No flight risk
The apex court concluded that Sisodia poses no flight risk due to his “deep roots in society,” and most of the evidence is already documented reducing the chance of tampering.
Impact Shorts
More Shorts5. Conditions on bail
While the Supreme Court considered imposing conditions similar to those in the Arvind Kejriwal case, it rejected the request to restrict Sisodia from visiting the chief minister’s office or the Delhi Secretariat.
6. Critical of lower courts
The Supreme Court found errors in the trial court and the Delhi High Court’s handling of the case, particularly their failure to consider the trial delay as a significant factor.
7. Contradictory stance by agencies
The apex court noted the contradictory position of the ED and CBI, which claimed readiness to expedite the trial while simultaneously requesting more time for supplementary chargesheets.
8. Prosecution’s delay not attributable to Sisodia
Justice BR Gavai clarified that Sisodia’s requests for document inspections were legitimate for ensuring a fair trial and not responsible for the trial’s delay.
9. Reference to recent precedents
The Supreme Court referred to recent precedents that prevent investigating agencies from opposing bail solely based on the severity of the offence if they cannot guarantee a timely trial.
10. Rejection of ‘snake and ladder’ argument
The Supreme Court dismissed the suggestion that Sisodia should seek bail from the trial court likening it to a “snake and ladder” game that would unjustly prolong his detention.
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
