Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vivek Jain, AOR Mr. Mohd. Irshad, Adv. Mr. Rajat Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Amit Bhandari, Adv. Ms. Suchitra Kumbhat, Adv. Mr. Karan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rajat Jain, Adv. Mr. Sadiq Noor, Adv. Ms. Arveen, Adv. Mr. Mohit Siwach, Adv. Mr. Kaustubh Khanna, Adv. Mr. Kautubh Khanna, Adv. Mr. Rishikesh, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Suryaprakash V Raju, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Adv. Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Adv. Mr. Suryaprakash V. Raju, A.S.G. Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Adv. Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Adv. Ms. Aakriti Mishra, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Ms. Abhipriya,Adv. Mr. Samrat Goswami,Adv. Mr. Hitarth Raja,Adv. Mr. Harsh Paul Singh,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Sarkar,Adv. Mr. Animesh Upadhyay,Adv. Mr. Sathvik Reddy,Adv. Mr. Vivek Gaurav,Adv. Suradhish Vats,Adv. Mr. Kshitiz Agarwal,Adv. Ms Shweta Desai,Adv. Ms. Nidhi Saini,Adv.

Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points regarding the judgment:

• Case Details: The Supreme Court of India allowed the bail appeals of Manish Sisodia (former Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi) in Criminal Appeal No. 3295 of 2024, arising out of the Delhi Liquor scam investigations by the CBI and ED (!) (!) (!) .
• Preliminary Objection on Maintainability: The Court rejected the Respondent's argument that the appellant could not file a second set of Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) after a previous liberty was granted to approach the trial court, stating that relegating the appellant to lower courts would be a "travesty of justice" and make them "run from pillar to post" (!) (!) (!) (!) .
• Right to Speedy Trial: The Court emphasized that the right to speedy trial and liberty are "sacrosanct rights" under Article 21 of the Constitution and that bail should not be withheld as a punishment (!) (!) (!) (!) .
• Application of PMLA Section 45: The Court held that in cases involving delay coupled with long incarceration, the right to bail must be read into Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., overriding the strict "triple test" if the trial is not progressing (!) (!) (!) (!) .
• Delay in Trial: The Court found that the trial had not commenced despite a 17-month period of incarceration, and the prosecution's assurance to conclude investigation by July 3, 2024, made the trial impossible within the earlier 6-8 month timeline (!) (!) (!) (!) .
• Role of Accused in Delay: The Court rejected the prosecution's claim that the appellant caused delays through frequent applications under Section 207 Cr.P.C., noting that many applications were allowed and that the volume of documents (69,000 pages) required reasonable time for inspection (!) (!) (!) (!) .
• Voluminous Evidence: The case involves 493 witnesses and approximately 69,000 pages of documents, making the conclusion of the trial in the near future impossible (!) (!) .
• Conditions for Bail: Bail was granted subject to strict conditions, including surrendering the passport, reporting to the Investigating Officer twice a week, and not influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence (!) (!) (!) .