Delhi Court Acquits Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia in Liquor Policy Case
In a pivotal ruling, the Rouse Avenue Court has acquitted former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia in the high-profile liquor policy case. The court found insufficient evidence to frame charges against them, concluding a significant chapter in this controversial investigation. The case, linked to the now-revoked 2022 Delhi Excise Policy, had seen multiple charge sheets filed by the CBI. The verdict has sparked varied reactions in political circles, with the Aam Aadmi Party celebrating it as a victory for truth, while opposition parties call for further discussions on the implications of the case. This ruling could have lasting effects on Delhi's political landscape.
Feb 27, 2026, 12:16 IST
Court Ruling in Liquor Policy Case
In a significant development in the Delhi liquor scam case, the Rouse Avenue Court has acquitted former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia. Special Judge Jitendra Singh delivered this verdict in response to the case filed by the CBI. It is noteworthy that the court had reserved its order after hearing detailed arguments from the CBI and all accused on February 12, which was announced today.
This case pertains to the Delhi Excise Policy of 2022, which was later revoked. At the time the case was registered, Kejriwal was serving as the Chief Minister, and Sisodia was the Deputy Chief Minister. The CBI had filed its first charge sheet in 2022, followed by several supplementary charge sheets. The agency alleged that a group known as the South Lobby paid ₹100 crores to influence the policy in their favor.
The CBI had filed charges against a total of 23 accused, including Kejriwal and Sisodia, as well as K. Kavita, Kuldeep Singh, Narendra Singh, Vijay Nair, Abhishek Boinpalli, Arun Ramchandra Pillai, Mootha Gautam, Sameer Mahendru, Amandeep Singh Dhal, Arjun Pandey, Buchhibabu Gorantla, Rakesh Joshi, Damodar Prasad Sharma, Prince Kumar, Chanpreet Singh Riot, Arvind Kumar Singh, Durgesh Pathak, Amit Arora, Vinod Chauhan, Ashish Mathur, and P. Sarath Chandra Reddy.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General D.P. Singh and Advocate Manu Mishra represented the CBI. The agency argued that the criminal conspiracy charge should be viewed in its entirety and that the adequacy of evidence should be assessed during the trial. The CBI maintained that there was sufficient material to frame charges against all accused.
On the other hand, Senior Advocate N. Hariharan, representing Kejriwal, contended that there was no solid or criminal evidence linking his client to the alleged conspiracy. He pointed out that Kejriwal's name was included in the fourth supplementary charge sheet, which merely reiterated previous allegations. Hariharan also argued that Kejriwal was performing his official duties, and policy-making is a collective governmental process.
The defense emphasized that Kejriwal's name was absent from the initial charge sheet and the three supplementary charge sheets, appearing only in the fourth one. They raised questions about the need for further investigation and the evidential significance of statements from government witness Raghav Magunta and others.
After considering the arguments from all parties and reviewing the submitted documents, the court concluded that the available material was insufficient to frame charges. Consequently, the court acquitted Kejriwal and Sisodia, marking a significant chapter's end in this high-profile case.
Following the verdict, there was a widespread reaction in political circles. The Aam Aadmi Party hailed it as a victory for truth, while opposition parties called for a discussion on the broader implications of the case. Legal experts believe this ruling sends a crucial message to investigative agencies about the necessity of strong evidence when filing charge sheets. It remains to be seen whether the investigative agency will challenge this order in the High Court. For now, this ruling from the Rouse Avenue Court could have long-lasting effects on the political landscape of the capital.