Non-recovery of cash not prima facie proof no graft took place: HC on Sisodia
NEW DELHI: Non-recovery of ill-gotten money can’t be prima facie proof that no corruption has taken place because a person now uses new technologies to commit offences without leaving behind any trace, Delhi high court has observed, while denying bail to AAP’s Manish Sisodia in the city excise policy case.
In its order pronounced Tuesday and uploaded Wednesday, HC said “recovery of cash from a person may not necessarily be a mandatory requirement in a money laundering case where allegations are part of a conspiracy comprising multiple accused.” It added the liquor policy case involves commission of “serious offence” of corruption in public office and laundering, which “strikes at the heart of economic and social systems, undermining the rule of law and eroding public trust in institutions.”
Delhi High Court rejected the argument that no money was recovered from the former deputy chief minister while pointing out to statements of some hawala dealers and other witnesses recorded in course of the probe.
"This court is of the view that the prosecution has made out a prima facie case of commission of money laundering under Section 3 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) against Manish Sisodia at this stage," high court observed.
HC said the form "of corruption which has the tendency of stealing legitimate resources of the poor ordinary people and giving it to the rich can be one of the worst."
It noted that the new excise policy has "eradicated" the common and small-time businesses and gave the entire playing field in the liquor business to those who had "money, power and had created a cartel" on the basis of financial gains to those formulating a policy, which adds to the seriousness of the offence.
"The courts of law may be considered as constant thorns in the way of free-flowing corruption and, even if that be so and are termed as thorns, it scores the victory for the masses," Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
