The Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed the petition filed by Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh against his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate and remand in connection with the Delhi liquor policy case, reported Live Law.

Singh, a Rajya Sabha MP, was arrested by the agency on October 4. He moved an application in Delhi court on October 7, alleging that the Enforcement Directorate created false grounds to shift him to a local police station lockup to torture him. On October 13, he moved the High Court challenging his arrest.

After listening to his counsel, senior advocate Vikram Chaudhari, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that the Enforcement Directorate is a premier investigating agency and ascribing political motives to it may impact the country’s image, reported Bar and Bench.

The court also called the petition “premature” as the investigation is ongoing. It said that there is nothing on record to conclude that the statement of accused-turned-approver Dinesh Arora was recorded under pressure or in violation of any procedure.

Chaudhari had told the court that the Enforcement Directorate arrested Singh, a reputed political leader, without complying with due process of law. He said that Singh was never issued any summons or called for questioning.

What is the case about?

The Central Bureau of Investigation and the Enforcement Directorate have alleged that the Aam Aadmi Party government in November 2021 modified the now-scrapped excise policy to ensure a 12% profit margin for wholesalers and a nearly 185% profit margin for retailers.

Former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia was arrested in the case by the Central Bureau of Investigation on February 26 and is currently in jail.

The Enforcement Directorate named Singh in its chargesheet filed in December last year, reported The Indian Express. The AAP leader’s name came up in the statement of Dinesh Arora, who said that he initially met Sisodia through Singh.

Singh served a notice to the Enforcement Directorate in April, accusing the agency of carrying out a “false, malicious campaign” against him.

In its reply, the agency said that out of the four references to him in a supplementary chargesheet filed by the agency, “a typographical/clerical error” had inadvertently crept in at one place. “Instead of ‘Rahul Singh’, ‘Sanjay Singh’ was inadvertently mentioned at only one reference,” it said.