In a fresh setback to senior AAP leader and former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, the Delhi High Court on Monday declined him bail in a money laundering case linked to alleged irregularities in the city government's excise policy, saying the charges against him were “very serious in nature”.

Besides rejecting Sisodia's plea, the High Court also refused bail to businessmen Abhishek Boinpally, Benoy Babu and Vijay Nair, who are co-accused in the money laundering case lodged by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) arising from the alleged scam.

Sisodia was arrested in connection with the case on March 9. This matter has to be visited with a “different approach” as a deep rooted conspiracy involving huge loss of public funds has been alleged, the court observed while rejecting his bail application.  Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said the former deputy chief minister of Delhi has not been able to pass the “triple test” for bail under the anti-money laundering law in which the court has to see whether an accused is likely to flee from justice, tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.

 “The present case arises out of an alleged conspiracy wherein the government framed an excise policy with a malafide intention to recoup the kickbacks received in advance from certain individuals and to further generate ill money from the liquor trade. 

“There are witnesses and witnesses on record to show that certain outsiders were actively participating from the stage of drafting and formulation of the policy,” the high court said in the 56-page judgment on Sisodia's bail plea.

It said the statements of the witnesses clearly indicate some “extraneous” factors were working since the time of conceptualisation, formulation and drafting of the excise policy. The allegation regarding generation of the e-mails in support of the excise policy also raises the “red flag that everything was not being done in a transparent and bonafide manner”, the high court said.

“This court at this stage cannot go into the probative value of the witnesses nor can it meticulously examine those facts. The involvement of the third parties in the formulating and drafting of the policy certainly points at mens rea (criminal intent),” it said.

 Justice Sharma said he has gone through the order of the special court which had earlier dismissed Sisodia's bail petition, and he does not find any infirmity or illegality in the decision.

The special court has passed a reasoned order on the basis of material available on record, Justice Sharma said, adding “The petitioner (Sisodia) is not entitled to bail and the petition is accordingly dismissed.”

He said the high court was fully conscious of the fact that personal liberty is a “sacrosanct right and pre-trial detention cannot be taken as a punitive measure”.  However, the court has to strike a balance between the interest of an individual and the interest of the society at large, the judge said. The judge, in his 45-page order passed on the bail plea by Nair, observed that the allegations are “extremely serious in nature” and the alleged conspiracy in the present case was “peculiar in nature where the excise policy was allegedly framed with mala fide intention”.