New Delhi, 6th April 2024
In a scathing critique of the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) handling of the alleged liquor policy scam, senior AAP leader and Delhi Cabinet Minister, Ms. Atishi, has affirmed that the investigative agency is deliberately not acting against BJP and its allies, and is impartial. Despite a two-year probe, no concrete evidence has been unearthed against any AAP leaders, yet the ED persists in pursuing this case against them only. Ms. Atishi raised concerns about the agency’s focus on the PMLA money trail while overlooking evidence against the BJP, as highlighted in the electoral bond list released by the Election Commission of India under the directive of the Supreme Court. With five pointed questions, she challenges the ED’s actions and questions its impartiality in the case.
Addressing the media during a press conference, Ms. Atishi stated, “The ED has been trying to find a money trail in the so-called liquor policy scam for the last two years. Why is the ED looking for a money trail? Because the ED is investigating the case under PMLA. What exactly is money laundering? It refers to fraudulent money transactions, and ED investigates questions like who received the amount, what was it used for, who used it, etc. For the last two years, the ED has been trying to find the money trail against the AAP leaders, all in vain. They have not been able to locate even a single penny under proceeds of crime. Even the Supreme Court has repeatedly questioned the ED on this money trail. The Apex Court repeatedly asked the ED to answer where is the money trail related to the AAP? Where is the money trail related to Shri Manish Sisodia, Shri Sanjay Singh, and other AAP leaders? The ED had no answers to this. Justice Sanjiv Khanna has clearly stated that the ₹100 crore money trail the ED is talking about has not been proven, it is a matter of debate.”
Ms. Atishi further added how the AAP leaders have been arrested by the ED without any evidence in the case. “Many of our senior leaders including Shri Manish Sisodia, Shri Sanjay Singh, and even the Chief Minister of Delhi Shri Arvind Kejriwal, solely based on the ED’s suspicion of money laundering. However on 21st March, for the first time ever, concrete evidences of money trail came into light in this alleged liquor policy scam case. Everything was revealed, who took the money, who gave the money, where and when did the transaction happen, where was the money used,” she stated.
“When raids, summons, and arrests can be done solely on the basis of speculations of money laundering, then why has the ED not taken any action based on solid evidence in the last 16 days? How many summons did they send in the last 16 days? How many raids did they conduct? How many arrests have been made so far? The ED has done absolutely nothing in this matter so far because the money trail goes from liquor businessman Sarath Chandra Reddy to BJP’s account.”
Addressing the ED, the senior AAP leader raised five important questions. “First, given that concrete evidences have been found in the case, that liquor businessman Sarath Chandra Reddy, who has given donations worth ₹55 crore to the BJP, then how is the ED investigating the matter, how many raids have been done, how many summons have been sent, and how many arrests have been made in the last 16 days?”
“Second, if you have arrested so many leaders of the AAP solely based on speculations, you have said it in court that you will prove the AAP as the main accused in the case. Now that there is evidence of money trail between Sarath Chandra Reddy and the BJP, then when will the BJP be tagged as an accused in the case?” she questioned.
“My third question is: When will the President of the BJP, Shri J. P. Nadda be served the summons, when will his properties be raided, when will he be arrested? The ED needs to answer this,” She affirmed.
Ms. Atishi further questioned, “Apart from this, the ED also claimed that the money extorted in this so-called liquor policy scam was used for campaigning in the Goa elections two years ago. They have been calling the candidate, workers, and everyone who was involved in the election campaigning for interrogation. Based on the same mindset that election campaigning is an expensive affair, there’s another ideology that a candidate needs to give money to the party to get a ticket. On 29th March, when another accused in the liquor policy case, Magunta Sreenivasulu Reddy, was given a ticket from BJP alliance TDP; is the ED investigating this matter? This is my fourth question, is the ED investigating if Magunta Reddy and his son Raghava Reddy have given any donations to the BJP? Has the ED begun investigating this matter yet?”
“My fifth question is: Today, you (ED) are investigating a two year old Goa election, but Magunta Sreenivasulu Reddy and his son’s elections are campaigning for their elections today. They are campaigning for the elections from BJP’s alliance today, has the ED investigated their election campaigning? Did you (ED) investigate where the money is coming from? Where are they spending the funds? How are they managing the arrangements, the tents, the posters, the chairs, and the sound system, and everything else? If you start investigating this today, then you would not have to call people two years later to investigate the money trail, the elections are happening now. Has the ED started investigating the election campaigning of BJP alliance partner TDP (Telugu Desam Party)?” She concluded by appealing to ED to answer these questions publicly.
