ED cannot keep people under pre-trial detention for so long: Supreme Court grants bail to Benoy Babu in Delhi excise policy scam case

The Supreme Court on Friday granted bail to Pernod Ricard India regional head Benoy Babu in connection with a money-laundering case arising out of the alleged Delhi excise policy scam [Benoy Babu vs Directorate of Enforcement]. .A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti stated that that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) cannot keep someone behind bars for 13 months with no charges being framed."This is not proper. You cannot keep people in pre-trial detention for so long. More accused are still to be brought in," Justice Khanna remarked..This is not proper. You cannot keep people in pre-trial detention for so long.Justice Sanjiv Khanna to ED.The Delhi High Court had in July denied Babu bail, leading to the present appeal before the top court. The case arose out of a first information report (FIR) registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).He was earlier granted bail in the CBI case.It is alleged that officials of the Delhi government had connived to grant liquor licenses to certain traders in exchange for bribes.The central agencies' case is that the excise policy was tweaked and the profit margins changed to benefit certain traders. Kickbacks were received in exchange for the same, it is further alleged.The ED and the CBI registered cases in relation to the alleged scam after Delhi Lieutenant Governor (LG) VK Saxena recommended a CBI probe based on a report by the Delhi Chief Secretary. The report claimed that former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia violated statutory provisions and notified a policy that had significant financial implications.The central agencies have alleged that Babu was involved in the conversion of bribe money into legitimate funds..In today's hearing before the top court, Senior Advocate Harish Salve appearing for Babu, stated that he had been inside jail for 13 months. Further, his alleged role in the case is different from Sisodia, whose bail plea was recently rejected by the present bench. He added that Babu was in effect a junior employee with no policy-making powers."Completely bogus case being run by ED, on the face of it. They [Babu and other accused] met after policy was uploaded." Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, appearing for the ED, then pressed for a similar order as in Sisodia's case, where it was ruled that a plea for regular bail can again be pressed if trial is not complete in six months.The bench refused to direct the same given the long incarceration of Babu. The ASG then stated that the judgment in Vijay Madanlal states that Section 436A of the Criminal Procedure Code, which calls for release on bail if accused has served half of ordinary sentence in the offence, does not apply to money-laundering cases.However, Justice Khanna stressed that the provision was an enabling one, and not a disabling one.."Leave granted. Trial has no commenced in the sense that charges have not been framed. Observations in judgment in Manish Sisodia case highlighted. Having regard to the aforesaid factum, including period of incarceration already suffered by the appellant, we allow the present appeal and direct that he be released on bail in chargesheet so and so (in ED case). He is a Prosecution Witness. He is directed to be released on bail," the Court ordered.The Court also rejected the ASG's request to not treat the case as precedent.