The case has sparked a political frenzy in Delhi, with the opposition accusing the AAP of corruption and the AAP claiming it is a politically driven attempt by the national government to discredit the party. In its second supplementary chargesheet in the Delhi liquor policy case, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has accused Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MP Raghav Chadha. The chargesheet was submitted in connection with the suspected scam in the Delhi government’s excise policy for 2021-22 to give license to liquor retailers, according to India Today. The policy was later abandoned.

CM Arvind, Manish Sisodia’s former secretary, reportedly informed the ED that a meeting took place at the former Deputy Chief Minister’s residence, and Chadha was present. Punjab Excise Commissioner Varun Roojam, Vijay Nair, an accused in the case, and other officers from the Punjab Excise Directorate were also present. This shift came just a few days after the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) named Manish Sisodia as an accused in the case. The CBI filed its first supplementary chargesheet in a Delhi court, alleging that the Delhi government’s excise policy was tailored to reward select dealers who had allegedly paid bribes.

The party has disputed the claims, claiming that it is a politically driven attempt by the central government to smear the party. Chadha has also denied any wrongdoing and has accused the national government of bullying AAP leaders. The Delhi liquor policy case has been making headlines since it was first revealed in June 2020. The Delhi government has formed a committee to look into the claims of discrepancies in the excise policy. The policy was repealed after the committee delivered its findings in September 2020.

The matter has sparked a big political uproar in Delhi, with opposition parties accusing the AAP of corruption. The AAP, on the other hand, has accused the government of utilising the agencies to target the party. The investigation into the matter is still ongoing, and additional revelations are likely in the following days. The case has raised concerns about the transparency and accountability of government policies, as well as the need for better monitoring of such policies and the independence of investigating bodies.