In Shorts
- Delhi court discharged Kejriwal and others in the excise policy case, saying evidence was insufficient.
- Kejriwal accused top BJP leadership of conspiring to eliminate the Aam Aadmi Party through fabricated charges.
- The verdict has sparked strong reactions from AAP leaders and supporters, who call it vindication.
In a major legal development, a Delhi court on Friday discharged former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, his deputy Manish Sisodia and 21 other accused in the long-running excise policy controversy, after finding the prosecution’s case weak and lacking prima facie evidence.
Speaking to reporters following the judgment, Kejriwal described the entire episode as a calculated political conspiracy aimed at destroying the Aam Aadmi Party’s credibility and ending its political journey. He specifically accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah of engineering the case to finish off his party.
“It was a fake case designed to attack my honesty and reputation,” Kejriwal said, asserting that he has spent his life building trust and service in the public eye. The AAP chief claimed that central investigative agencies were used over several years to press charges that should never have been filed.
The court order, delivered by Special Judge Jitendra Singh at Rouse Avenue Court, criticized the charge sheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation, noting contradictions and lack of substantial evidence. This was central to the decision not to proceed to trial.
AAP workers celebrated the verdict at party headquarters, distributing sweets and playing traditional instruments. Several leaders said the judgment would energize the party’s base ahead of upcoming local and assembly elections. Sunita Kejriwal, the AAP leader’s wife, thanked the judiciary for its decision and reaffirmed faith in the justice system.
Political responses have been swift. While AAP leaders hailed the ruling as proof of their integrity, supporters of the ruling BJP have dismissed the allegations of conspiracy and defended the role of investigative agencies. Meanwhile, discussions over potential appeals and continuing investigations by the Enforcement Directorate remain ongoing.




































Leave a Reply