CBI challenges Kejriwal, Sisodia discharge in liquor policy case, hearing today

Today's hearing comes days after Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia have accused the CBI of approaching the Delhi High Court with "unprecedented haste" and in the "most unserious manner".Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia are seeking dismissal of the CBI's revision petition in liquor policy case.The Delhi High Court will on Monday hear the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) petition challenging the trial court's decision to discharge AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and 21 others in the liquor policy case.Justice Manoj Jain is also expected to hear applications filed by the former Delhi Chief Minister and his deputy seeking dismissal of the CBI's revision petition, arguing that the plea is not maintainable.In separate applications filed on August 13, Kejriwal and Sisodia accused the CBI of moving the High Court with "unprecedented haste" and in the "most unserious manner".The senior AAP leaders pointed out that the CBI filed its revision petition within four hours of the trial court passing its discharge order. They argued that the probe agency had not properly considered the trial court's findings in its judgment, which ran to more than 500 pages.Kejriwal and Sisodia further contended that the trial court had examined the matter for more than three months before discharging all the accused and that the CBI had failed to identify any specific finding in the discharge order that was "perverse" or reflected a legal or procedural irregularity. The applications came after Justice Jain had granted Kejriwal, Sisodia and AAP leader Durgesh Pathak a final opportunity to respond to the CBI's challenge within two weeks.On February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others, observing that the prosecution case was unable to withstand judicial scrutiny and had been discredited in its entirety.The CBI challenged the order in the High Court, calling it "patently illegal" and "perverse" and alleging that it suffered from errors apparent on the face of the record.The probe agency has argued that the trial court effectively conducted a "mini-trial" at the stage of framing charges and reached its conclusions by selectively examining the prosecution's case.It has also alleged that the court failed to properly appreciate the evidence and made unwarranted adverse observations against the investigating agency and its officer.- EndsPublished By: India Today Web Desk Published On: Aug 17, 2026 09:24 IST