Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesBREAKING | Excise Policy: Supreme Court Judges Differed On CBI’s Action, But...

BREAKING | Excise Policy: Supreme Court Judges Differed On CBI’s Action, But Grants Bail To Arvind Kejriwal

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Supreme Court granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the excise policy case. 

The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan presided over the matter.

Justice Suryakant stated that the Arrest by the CBI is legal. Arvind Kejriwal shall be released on a bail subject to furnishing of the bond of  Rs. 10 lakh. Kejriwal was further restrained from making comments on the case in public.

However, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan while deferring observed that the arrest was perhaps to frustrate bail to Arvind Kejriwal in ED case. 

Justice Bhuyan remarked “CBI must ensure that the perception of it being a ‘caged parrot’ is discarded. It must be above board.”

The court had reserved the verdict on September 5 after hearing counsels representing Kejriwal and CBI.

Background 

The Delhi government introduced the excise policy in 2021-22 with the objectice to revitalise the city’s flagging liquor business by replacing the sales-volume-based regime with a license fee for traders, and promised swankier stores, free of the infamous metal grilles, ultimately giving customers a better buying experience. 

However, the policy was scrapped after Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena sought a CBI probe into the policy alleging irregularities. 

Read More: Excise Policy Scam: Supreme Court Grants Interim Bail To Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal In The Money Laundering Case

As per ED, the Kejriwal-led AAP received kickbacks to the tune of  Rs. 100 crore to finalise the excise policy. It was also alleged that a large chunk of this money was used by the party in its Goa election campaign.

Case Title: Arvind Kejriwal V/S Central Bureau Of Investigation 

Case No.: Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).11023/2024

Date: 13/09/2024

Counsel For Petitioner:  Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv.

Counsel For Respondent:  Mr. Suryaprakash V. Raju, A.S.G.

Read Order

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

ITO Cuts Rs. 1.42 Lakh Income Tax Demand to Rs. 671 Despite S. 154 Time-Limit Objection [READ ORDER]

In a significant taxpayer-relief case, the Income Tax Department has reduced a demand of...

Bombay High Court Quashes Rs. 20.16 Crore TP Adjustment as Mandatory SCN Was Not Served

The Bombay High Court has set aside a transfer pricing order proposing an adjustment...

Homebuyers Can’t Be Penalised for Developer’s “Past Sins”: Supreme Court Rejects NOIDA’s Time Extension Charges as CIRP Costs

In a significant ruling protecting homebuyers affected by prolonged insolvency proceedings, the Supreme Court...

S. 106 Can’t Replace Proof of Guilt: Supreme Court Acquits Man in Kidnapping-Murder Case, Calls Investigation ‘Shoddy’

The Supreme Court has acquitted a man convicted in a kidnapping and murder case...

More like this

ITO Cuts Rs. 1.42 Lakh Income Tax Demand to Rs. 671 Despite S. 154 Time-Limit Objection [READ ORDER]

In a significant taxpayer-relief case, the Income Tax Department has reduced a demand of...

Bombay High Court Quashes Rs. 20.16 Crore TP Adjustment as Mandatory SCN Was Not Served

The Bombay High Court has set aside a transfer pricing order proposing an adjustment...

Homebuyers Can’t Be Penalised for Developer’s “Past Sins”: Supreme Court Rejects NOIDA’s Time Extension Charges as CIRP Costs

In a significant ruling protecting homebuyers affected by prolonged insolvency proceedings, the Supreme Court...