The Delhi liquor policy scam has entangled key political figures and raised significant questions about corruption and political influence in the excise policy. The alleged connection to the 'South Group' involving Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy, Raghav Magunta Reddy, and Sarath Reddy has brought attention to the intricate web of financial transactions and political affiliations. The scandal, which led to the arrest of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, has sparked controversy and legal battles, with accusations of bribery and kickbacks to manipulate the liquor business in Delhi.
The alleged liquor policy scam south connection involves 3 key people - Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy, Raghav Magunta Reddy, and Sarath Reddy. Magunta Reddy is a Member of Parliament from Andhra Pradesh and a former member of the YSR Congress Party. In March 2024, he resigned from the YSR Congress and became a member of Telugu Desam Party (TDP), an ally to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Raghav Reddy is son of Magunta Reddy, and is contesting in the 2024 Lok Sabha Elections from the Ongole constituency as a part of the TDP. Finally, Sarath Reddy is a director at Aurobindo Pharma Limited. Reportedly, five days after his arrest, Aurobindo Pharma donated ₹5 crores to the BJP through Electoral Bonds. Aurobindo Pharma had bought electoral bonds for a total of Rs 52 crore. Of which, Rs 34.5 crore was donated to the BJP, Rs 15 crore to the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS), and Rs 2.5 crore to the Telugu Desam Party (TDP).
Kejriwal’s lawyer Singhvi claimed that Raghav Reddy, who was arrested in February 2023, had not made any statements against Kejriwal until his bail plea got rejected. When the Delhi High Court granted him interim bail for 15 days for family emergency, the ED had opposed this and challenged it in the Supreme Court. Singvi pointed out that soon after this push back from the ED against the bail order, Raghav Reddy’s father, Magunta Reddy, was pressured into giving a statement implicating Kejriwal. A day later, Raghav was granted immediate bail, with no objections from the ED.
A similar pattern, Singhvi suggested, played out in Sarath Reddy’s interim bail application. His request for bail in light of his wife’s cancer treatment was opposed by the ED. After Sarath Reddy provided statements implicating Kejriwal, the ED’s objections disappeared.
Singhvi then pointed out that the ED suppressed several statements provided by Magunta, Raghav, and Sarath Reddy. He argued that all statements should be produced and provided on record. Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju interjected and pointed out that the statements were irrelevant.
According to Sanghvi, they made multiple statements which did not implicate Shri Arvind Kejriwal. “All the statements where there is no allegation against Shri Arvind Kejriwal were deliberately ignored by the ED while perusing the material and forming “reason to believe” in his guilt.”
The Supreme Court has asked the ED to respond to the 3 major questions in Friday's hearing.
1. Explain the timing or arrest. Why was he arrested just before the General elections and just a week after the implementation of the MCC?
2. Why is there a huge gap between initiation of the proceedings (registration of case) and arrest of Arvind Kejriwal? The Court also observed that arrest is not an option always, “Life and liberty is important.”
3. The Supreme Court noted that in the matter linked to former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, the investigators have claimed they have found material, but in Mr Kejriwal's case nothing has been brought up... tell us where does the Kejriwal case lie then?
The court also asked why Kejriwal did not file a plea for bail in the trial court, Singhvi told the bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta that they have approached the Supreme Court as it has 'wider jurisdiction'. The hearing in the case was resumed on Wednesday.
Comments