The Supreme Court clarified on Thursday that the question it raised yesterday regarding the ‘political party’, which was alleged to be a beneficiary, not being made an accused in the Delhi liquor policy scam case, was not meant to implicate anyone.
Hearing the bail application of former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia yesterday, the top court of the country, without taking the name of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), had asked Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju (appearing for CBI and ED) that as far as PMLA was concerned, the whole case of the national agencies was that it went to a political party.
That political party was still not an accused. He (Sisodia) was not the beneficiary, the political party was the beneficiary, it noted.
The Bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti today made an oral observation that it was only asking a legal question. It said in case as per the prosecution A was not being prosecuted, could B or C be prosecuted? The question asked yesterday was posed as a legal one in that context, it added.
Senior Advocate Dr.Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Sisodia today, took objection to the media reports about the Apex Court’s query.
He said yesterday, the Court had put a query about his links. This morning, several reputed newspapers carried headlines saying that the Court has asked the ED why AAP was not made an accused. Singhvi said even the channels reported that ED wanted to make AAP a party in the case.
The Apex Court had the right to ask questions in court, said the Bench, adding that it did not get affected by what the media reported.
Singhvi said that both he and the ASG knew what the Bench asked, but it was not the point. It was apparently being made the basis to make AAP a party, he added.
The ASG responded by saying that he was asked by the media this morning regarding this, to which he replied that if there was evidence, nobody would be spared.