Cong ensures Kejriwal discharge is not big jolt to Modi

Special Judge Jitendra Singh not just discharged former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, former education minister Manish Sisodia, Telangana politician K. Kavitha, and Aam Aadmi Party leader Vijay Nair, and others in the liquor policy case but also came down heavily on the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). By implication, the decision also gives credence to the allegations that the Union government is using the CBI, the Enforcement Directorate (ED), and other Central agencies to target political opponents. Importantly, the Special Judge also expressed his displeasure over the casual manner the term “South group” was used. “The court considers it necessary to place on record its concern with the repeated and deliberate use of the expression, ‘South group,’ by the investigating agency to describe a set of accused persons, ostensibly based on their regional origin or place of residence.” He castigated the CBI over its chargesheet, which he described as “conjecture rather than concrete evidence.” Angry with the conduct of the CBI’s investigating officer, the judge recommended a departmental inquiry against him.

An important point to notice in the liquor case is that the accused were discharged, not acquitted. The discharge happens before the beginning of the trial; it shows that there was not even a prima facie case against the accused. The acquittal, on the other hand, happens after the completion of the trial. Quite apart from saving the accused from the tribulations that accompany any criminal trial, the verdict presents them as honest and clean people. The other side of the coin is that the Narendra Modi government, which hurled allegations of corruption at AAP leaders, becomes vulnerable to the accusation of using the CBI, ED and other agencies for political purposes. Sadly, for Opposition unity, though, the Congress hinted at AAP functioning as a “convenient ally” of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Congress leader Pawan Khera accused AAP of benefiting from political circumstances to weaken Congress before the Punjab and Gujarat elections. It may be recalled that about two years ago Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi had expressed solidarity with Kejriwal during his arrest period. They showed up at Delhi’s Ramlila Maidan against the arrest of Kejriwal and Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren.

And now, what could have been a booster dose for the unity and strength of the Opposition may not have much impact on politics, for the grand old party’s petty partisanship has been a spoilsport. By appearing reluctant to celebrate or even acknowledge the judicial relief granted to AAP leaders, the Congress may dilute the broader narrative of institutional misuse that it advanced in the past. Opposition politics, especially in a system dominated by a strong ruling party, often requires a delicate balance between competition and cooperation. Petty partisanship can undermine the credibility of calls for unity. The liquor policy case, therefore, is more than a legal episode. It is a mirror reflecting the state of India’s institutions and its opposition politics. The court’s order reaffirms the judiciary’s role as a check on executive excesses. It also highlights the fact that agencies need to be professional. At the same time, the political aftermath reveals the fragility of Opposition cohesion. If opposition parties are to mount an effective challenge to the ruling establishment, they will need to reconcile immediate electoral rivalries with longer-term institutional concerns.