Kejriwal, others gets clean chit in excise policy case

Taint of alleged corruption and wrongdoing against former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the Delhi excise policy issue was dusted off when a city court on Friday dismissed a CBI chargesheet against him.

The Rouse Avenue court also gave a clean chit to 22 others, including Kejriwal’s cabinet colleague Manish Sisodia and Telangana Jagruthi president K Kavitha. The court has also ordered a departmental inquiry against the investigating officer, probing the case. Hours after the verdict by special judge Jitendra Singh, the CBI immediately challenged the order in the Delhi High Court.

As news came in of the clean chit in the case that sent him into virtual political wilderness, a relieved Kejriwal broke down and said the corruption case against him was the “biggest political conspiracy” in the history of Independent India.

The clean chit for Kejriwal and his team is the latest legal reprieve for Opposition leaders in the country, providing a fresh impetus to the Opposition’s narrative that the BJP Government has selectively and deliberately targeted it using central investigating agencies. This is expected to put the BJP on the defensive and provide the Opposition with fresh ammunition a week and a half before the Budget Session of Parliament resumes.

The three-time former Delhi Chief Minister said the court had proved that he, Manish Sisodia and the Aam Aadmi Party were kattar imaandar. Addressing a press conference later in the day, he also dared Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP to hold elections in Delhi and see what happens.

 “I will quit politics if the BJP wins more than 10 seats,” Kejriwal said during a press conference hours after his acquittal. Kejriwal said they will file an application in a court for discharge in connection with the cases registered by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) as well. While Kejriwal was in jail for six months in the case, Sisodia was behind bars for almost two years.

In the 598-page order, Special Judge Jitendra Singh said, “This court has no hesitation in holding that the material placed on record does not disclose even a prima facie case, much less any grave suspicion, against any of the accused persons. Accordingly, Accused Numbers 1-23 are discharged of all the offences alleged against them in the present case”.

Meanwhile, the CBI spokesperson said, “The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has decided to appeal in the high court against the judgment of the trial court immediately since several aspects of the investigation have either been ignored or not considered adequately”.

Discharging Kejriwal, the court said there was no relevant document, file noting, electronic communication, financial transaction or digital evidence to directly or indirectly connect Kejriwal with any alleged policy manipulation or illegal gratification. “There is no material to show his presence at any conspiratorial meeting or to indicate his knowledge of any unlawful arrangement. The attempt to implicate him rests on an inference drawn from an uncorroborated accomplice-like statement,” the judge said.

The court said the mere invocation of the expression “conspiracy” does not dispense with the requirement of material indicating agreement and participation. “The prosecution proceeds on the premise that the policy was manipulated pursuant to a criminal design. If that foundation is not established, the subsequent allegations (of a larger conspiracy) necessarily lose their footing,” it said.

“In the absence of foundational material connecting Accused 18 with any criminal design and in the absence of independent corroboration of the statements of an accomplice-like witness relied upon, the attribution of a central conspiratorial role cannot be sustained,” it added. “…The suggestion that the Policy was manipulated to confer undue advantage is not borne out by the contemporaneous record. The clause evolution itself evidences transparency, regulatory intent and consultative policy-making. No adverse inference can, therefore, be drawn against Accused Number 18 (Arvind Kejriwal) based on the evolution of the Policy,” Special Judge Jitendra Singh wrote in the order, while discharging Kejriwal.

Discharging Sisodia, the Special Judge said, “There is no recovery of the alleged 36-page document or any device linking it to A-8 (Manish Sisodia), and even the prosecution’s WhatsApp material does not show knowledge of a 12% margin by alleged beneficiaries. Regarding Indospirits, the initial statement of the concerned officer made no allegation against A-8. Even subsequent statements only attribute a direction to process the file “as per rules”. The main charge sheet attributes alleged bribery to other officials; there is no basis to implicate A-8. In sum, there is no material showing the demand, receipt or facilitation of illegal gratification by A-8. The prosecution seeks to criminalise a policy decision without proving harm to the public interest or the essential ingredients of the offences. No case is made out against A-8”.

In his order, Singh said the investigation appears to have proceeded on a predetermined trajectory, implicating virtually every person associated with the formulation or implementation of the policy to lend an illusion of depth and credibility to an otherwise fragile narrative

“A cumulative appraisal of the record further reveals an investigative approach marked by an attempt to stitch together disparate fragments to create an impression of a vast and complex conspiracy, unsupported by legally admissible material,” he said. The judge said that the endeavour to further connect such allegations to the Goa Assembly elections, to project, layering, and utilisation of alleged proceeds of crime, rests more on inference and assumption than on legally sustainable material.

“Once the formulation of the (excise) policy is shown to be the product of deliberation, institutional scrutiny, and procedural compliance, any subsequent attempt to attribute criminality to its implementation becomes wholly untenable,” he said. The judge said the case’s very foundation - the allegation of payment of upfront money and its purported recoupment - stands fundamentally eroded.

“In the absence of a tainted policy or demonstrably unlawful implementation, the prosecution theory is reduced to conjecture. Private persons who sought to derive commercial advantage from a policy validly framed and lawfully implemented cannot be compelled to face the rigours of criminal prosecution,” his judgement read.

“Though there was no statutory or constitutional requirement mandating the obtaining of suggestions from the Lieutenant Governor, the file notings unmistakably reflect that such suggestions were nevertheless sought, examined, and incorporated. The procedural integrity of the policy-making process thus stands affirmed from the documentary record itself,” it said.

The court said that the alleged conspiracy was nothing more than a speculative construct resting on conjecture and surmise, devoid of any admissible evidence. “The excise policy case, as sought to be projected by the CBI, is wholly unable to survive judicial scrutiny and stands discredited in its entirety,” it said.

The court flagged the lapses in the investigation, saying, “The duty of the court is not merely to discount the tainted investigative material, but also to recommend initiation of appropriate departmental proceedings against the erring Investigating Officer (IO) for framing accused 1 (Kuldeep Singh) as an accused.” Earlier, while orally pronouncing the substantive portions of the verdict, the judge said, “I am recommending a departmental inquiry...” against the IO, after noting that “there was no material at all” against Singh.

BJP calls it miscarriage of justice

New Delhi: BJP has reacted sharply, terming it a “miscarriage of justice” and indicating that the legal battle was far from over. The party further stated that though a court has discharged Arvind Kejriwal for “lack of evidence”, the people of the national Capital have already given him a “political response on political grounds” and the probe agency will now decide its next course of action based on technical grounds.

Rajya Sabha MP and BJP spokesperson Sudhanshu Trivedi also said it is a “technical matter”, and the party will come up with a “structured response” on the court’s judgment, after studying it. Asked about the discharge of Kejriwal and the others from the case, Trivedi said. “The lower court has discharged them for lack of evidence. It is a technical matter.” Amit Malviya, in charge of the BJP’s national information and technology department, wrote on X, “On 27 February 2026, a Delhi court discharged former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Deputy CM Manish Sisodia in the Delhi liquor excise case.

This order, in light of the record so far, raises serious concerns and is a miscarriage of justice”.Asked about the charges levelled by Kejriwal against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah, Trivedi accused the AAP national convener of making “political” allegations.Delhi BJP president Virendra Sachdeva said the court, in its judgment, had acknowledged a lack of evidence at this stage, but added that the investigative agency had repeatedly alleged destruction of evidence. Raising questions over the policy, Sachdeva said the AAP supremo still did not have answers on key issues. “Arvind Kejriwal still does not have answers to certain questions: if the excise policy was proper, why was it withdrawn as soon as the investigation began, and what was the purpose of increasing the contractors’ commission?” he asked.