Breaking News: Supreme Court Grants Bail to AAP MP Sanjay Singh in PMLA Case on 2nd April

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court allowed Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh to leave jail in a money laundering case linked to the Delhi liquor policy. This decision came after the Enforcement Directorate (ED) agreed to it. The court emphasized that they weren’t commenting on the case’s details but ordered Singh’s release when the ED said it had no issue with it.

The group of judges including Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Dipankar Datta, and PB Varale made the decision. They mentioned that Singh can still participate in politics while on bail, but he shouldn’t talk about the case publicly. The Court also rejected Singh’s second petition against his arrest and detention.

Today’s morning session started with Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, speaking for Singh, saying that the whole case against Singh by the ED relies on the statement of Dinesh Arora, who first made nine statements clearing Singh before accusing him. It was pointed out that Arora got bail with no objections from the ED, but the court noted that the ED was being cunning.

Singhvi claimed that the ED allowed Arora’s bail with the condition that he later implicate Sanjay Singh in his statement under Section 50. He also alleged that the ED targeted Singh after he held a press conference, stating that agency officials visited his home right afterward.

The Senior Counsel questioned why Sanjay Singh was arrested and criticized the ED for not including Arora’s statements that cleared Singh in the evidence Singh could access. He urged the Court to stop this practice, calling it unjust.

Singhvi emphasized that Arora only accused Singh after being sent to judicial custody, and questioned the fairness of the prosecution using statements that Singh couldn’t access. He accused the ED of trying to get Arora bail without making it obvious.

When Justice Khanna asked if the alleged Rs. 2 crore was part of the initial offense, Singhvi said no. The Bench then asked if PMLA would apply if someone was caught accepting a bribe, even though it’s a separate offense. Singhvi replied that PMLA requires a connection to the proceeds of crime.

After hearing Singhvi and noting the lack of recovered money and Arora’s nine statements clearing Singh, the Bench asked the Additional Solicitor General SV Raju to check if Singh’s further custody was necessary.

In the afternoon session, Raju presented the ED’s concession, stating they had a debatable case but wouldn’t contest bail. Based on this, the Court granted bail to Singh for the PMLA offense, with conditions set by the Trial Court. The Bench clarified that the concession wouldn’t set a precedent and was made before arguments began.