During the arguments on Tuesday, senior advocate Mohit Mathur, appearing for Singh, told the judge that the ED had not called the accused for questioning even once before October 4, 2023, the day he was arrested.

The counsel claimed there were contradictions in the statements of accused-turned-approver Dinesh Arora and other witnesses.

Poll

Do you have a fixed sleep-wake cycle?

Yes 33.33%

No 33.33%

Sometimes 33.33%

Submit

View All In Poll

"Dinesh Arora's statement is hearsay... How can one assume that he is telling the truth," Singh's counsel said, adding he was a "tainted" witness and a "guilty accomplice".

"I (Singh) am not asking for discharge. I am only asking for bail. My personal liberty is sacrosanct in the Constitution," the counsel told the judge.

The Enforcement Directorate opposed the application, claiming that the probe was still underway, and if released on bail, Singh could hamper the investigation, tamper with evidence, and influence the witnesses.

The court, meanwhile, directed the ED to file written submissions, if any, within two days. It also directed the counsel appearing for Singh to file rejoinder within a day thereafter.

The anti-money laundering agency had arrested Singh on October 4. The ED has alleged that Singh played a key role in the formulation and implementation of the now- scrapped excise policy, which benefited certain liquor manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers, for monetary considerations.

Singh has rejected the claim and denied any wrongdoing.

This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever