ED Informs Delhi HC About Files Missing From Special Secretary (Vigilance)'S Office

(MENAFN- IANS) New Delhi, June 3 (IANS) The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Saturday informed the Delhi High Court about files missing from the office of the Special Secretary (Vigilance) the same day the Supreme Court made a decision on the Services matter.
The submission was made by Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain during the Court's hearing on the interim bail plea of former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia.
The counsel informed the court that an FIR was also lodged in this regard.
Senior Advocate Mohit Mathur, who was representing Sisodia, objected to the submission, stating that it was an argument of prejudice and a charge sheet had already been filed in the matter (in the Delhi Excise case).
On Friday, Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma reserved judgment on the matter of Sisodia's interim bail plea. A special sitting was held on Saturday, where Justice Sharma stated that after reading the interim bail application, he believed it must be heard.
Later, the High Court was informed that Sisodia went to meet his wife, but he couldn't see her as her condition deteriorated and she was hospitalised at LNJP Hospital.
The High Court requested a report from LNJP Hospital and reserved the order on the interim bail plea.
Hossain argued that Sisodia had filed another interim bail plea, but it was withdrawn on May 24. "There are judgments that say that such withdrawal amounts to dismissal unless they can demonstrate that something dramatic has changed," Hossain argued.
Mathur objected to the argument, stating that a person's life couldn't be so insignificant that her husband couldn't meet her even when she was in such a condition.
"Sisodia is the caretaker of the family. Their son is studying abroad. Would it make a person less of a caretaker if he is holding 18 portfolios? We are busy and dealing with multiple cases throughout the day. But don't we go back home at the end of the day and become the caretakers of our families? What kind of jurisprudence are we heading toward?" Mathur argued.
After hearing the contentions of both sides, the court has reserved its order.



Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.