Anna Hazare said – The court has given the verdict that there is no fault of Kejriwal so it has to be accepted.
Anna Hazare’s reaction to Kejriwal’s acquittal : In the Delhi Excise Policy case, Rouse Avenue Court has acquitted all the accused including AAP convenors Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia and rejected the CBI charge sheet. AAP and opposition parties have termed this decision of the court as the victory of truth. Meanwhile, social activist Anna Hazare has reacted to the acquittal of Kejriwal and Sisodia.
Read:- Main accused of Shine City scam Rashid Naseem arrested from Dubai, big action by Dubai Police on the request of ED-EOW.
Speaking to the media, Anna Hazare said, “Our country runs on the strength of its judicial and security systems. Despite being such a big country with different parties, castes, religions and communities, it works easily because of the Judiciary. Without it, there will be chaos and unrest. Now that the court has given its verdict that Arvind Kejriwal has no fault, it has to be accepted…”
On the court’s decision, Kejriwal’s lawyer senior advocate N. Hariharan said, “After hearing all the arguments, examining the charge sheet and going through thousands of documents, the court came to the conclusion that no case is made out. Both Arvind ji and Manish Sisodia ji have been discharged. Accused number one and two have also been discharged. After considering all the aspects, the court found that a case for discharge is made out and hence granted discharge.”
Sisodia’s lawyer Vivek Jain said, “In the excise scam, the Rouse Avenue Special Court has acquitted all the accused. This acquittal has come after the Court has seen and read all the evidence, all the statements and everything placed on record. After examining every statement and every document, the Court has held that no charge is made out against the accused persons Kejriwal, including Manish Sisodia.”
Jain further said, “I will not go into every detail, but the Court has made an observation that during the proceedings at the stage of framing of charges, the Court had sought a confessional statement recorded under section 306(4). The investigating officer had said that he did not have it. The Court noted that the statement was in a sealed cover, a copy of which was given to him. That statement was never produced in the charge sheet.”
Comments are closed.