NEW DELHI: Delhi Minister Atishi hailed the Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MP Sanjay Singh in the Delhi excise policy case, describing it as a victory for truth. Taking to social media platform X, Atishi expressed, “Satyamev Jayate.”
Addressing a press conference later, Atishi welcomed Singh’s release and emphasised the triumph of truth in the face of adversity. She stated, “Today, party leader Sanjay Singh’s bail has proved that truth always wins. You can suppress the truth but cannot erase it.”
ALSO READ: BJP issues defamation notice to Atishi over allegations
Singh, who was arrested last October in connection with the case, secured bail from a bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Dipankar Datta, and P B Varale. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) expressed no objection to Singh’s bail application.
Reacting to the court’s verdict, AAP leader Saurabh Bhardwaj remarked, “Today’s day will be considered as a great milestone in Indian democracy.” He questioned the absence of a money trail in the case, highlighting the lack of evidence against Singh.
The bench specified that Singh could continue his political activities but refrained from making statements related to the case. Singh’s release comes amidst a leadership vacuum within AAP, with Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former deputy Manish Sisodia currently incarcerated in Tihar Jail.
ALSO READ: Diabetic-Kejriwal’s ‘4.5 kg loss’ scare in AAP, Tihar says he’s good
During the court proceedings, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the ED, stated the agency had no objections to Singh’s bail, underscoring the lack of recovery of any incriminating evidence from Singh. Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing Singh, argued against his client’s arrest and remand, highlighting the case’s reliance on the statements of approvers. The bench emphasised that Singh’s bail should not set a precedent for other AAP leaders facing similar charges, including Kejriwal.
Singh’s arrest last year stemmed from allegations related to the excise policy case, wherein he was accused of playing a pivotal role in the formulation and implementation of a now-defunct policy benefiting certain liquor stakeholders.