The Aam Aadmi Party-led Delhi government has paid Rs 25.25 crores to lawyers appearing for the alleged Delhi Liquor Policy Scam (Delhi Excise Policy Scam) case in the court. In the last 18 months, the Delhi government has spent a total of Rs 28.10 crore, as per a report in The New Indian Express.
Out of the 2.25. crore spent on the Liquor Scam case, senior advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the AAP leaders, has received Rs 18.97 crores. Rahul Mehra, who appeared for Satyendra Jain’s cases, received Rs 5.30 crores during the same period.
In 2021-22, Singhvi received Rs 14.85 crore and another Rs 4.1 crore later. In 2020-21, Mehra received Rs 2.4 lakhs only, but in 2021-22 he received Rs 3.9 crores. In 2021-22 the lawyers contesting the Liquor Scam case received Rs 16.09 crores. In the eight months of 2022-23, they received Rs 5.24 crores.
Furthermore, the sources at the Raj Bhawan told TNIE that the total expenditure of the AAP government since the scam came to light was only Rs 6.70 crores. Most of the amount was spent on General Administration Department (GAD) and the health department.
The Delhi liquor policy scam
According to the chief secretary’s report, cartelisation and monopolies were taking place in the liquor trade under the new liquor policy. It was also alleged that liquor licences were illegally distributed to companies that had violated the terms and conditions of the New Excise Policy 2021-22.
According to reports, Manish Sisodia made changes to the excise policy without the mandatory approval of the LG. He had waived off ₹144.36 crores on licence fees to be paid by the private liquor vendors for licences in the name of the Covid-19 pandemic. He had removed the import pass fee of ₹50 per case of beer and had given undue benefits to liquor sellers by revising the prices of foreign liquor.
According to the CBI FIR, L-1 licences were issued illegally in exchange for bribes, and one of the traders had paid ₹1 crore to a company managed by a person who is an associate of Manish Sisodia. It was found that L-1 licence holders were issuing credit notes to retail vendors with the intention of diverting the funds to public servants, showing that it was a method of paying bribes in exchange for the licences. The licence holders also made false entries in their books of accounts to keep the records of such bribes straight.
