Delhi HC Records Kejriwal’s Recusal Plea Against Judge in Excise Case
The Delhi High Court recorded an affidavit from former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal alleging a conflict of interest against Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in the Delhi excise policy case. Kejriwal cited the judge’s children serving as government panel counsels as grounds for recusal. The CBI strongly opposed the plea, warning it would set a dangerous precedent and accusing Kejriwal of maligning the judiciary. While the court accepted Kejriwal’s submissions as written arguments, it clarified that the hearing would not be reopened, with the verdict on the recusal plea reserved.
Cross-source coverage
Wire timeline
Delhi HC Allows Kejriwal to File Response to Recusal Plea in Excise Case
The Delhi High Court permitted Aam Aadmi Party convenor Arvind Kejriwal to submit written arguments regarding a plea for the recusal of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma from hearing the excise policy case. Justice Sharma postponed the verdict on the recusal matter to 4:30 PM, describing the allowance as an exceptional measure to ensure Kejriwal does not feel unheard, despite earlier stating that arguments would not be reopened. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta strongly opposed this decision, arguing that no pleadings are typically accepted after a judgment is reserved and asserting that such flexibility is not afforded to ordinary citizens. The recusal plea stems from Kejriwal's allegation of a conflict of interest, citing that Justice Sharma’s children are empanelled as government advocates. The underlying case involves the Central Bureau of Investigation challenging a trial court's discharge of 23 accused individuals in the alleged liquor policy scam. This procedural development highlights the tension between strict legal protocols and the court's discretionary accommodation of a self-represented high-profile defendant.
The Indian ExpressDelhi High Court Accepts Kejriwal's Reply as Written Submissions in Recusal Plea
The Delhi High Court has agreed to accept the rejoinder submissions filed by former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in response to the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) opposition to his recusal plea. However, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma clarified that these documents would be treated as 'written submissions' rather than a formal rejoinder, noting that legal provisions do not typically allow for rejoinders to written submissions after an order is reserved. The court is scheduled to pronounce its judgment on the recusal plea at 4:30 PM. Kejriwal had sought the judge's recusal, citing a reasonable apprehension of bias because Justice Sharma's children are empanelled as central government counsel and receive assignments from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represents the CBI. Additionally, Kejriwal referenced the judge's attendance at events linked to the BJP and RSS. The CBI contested these claims, arguing that accepting such reasons would disqualify judges nationwide whose relatives serve on government panels. This hearing is part of the ongoing legal proceedings regarding the excise policy case.
The Indian ExpressCBI Opposes Kejriwal's Recusal Plea in Delhi High Court, Warns of Dangerous Precedent
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has opposed Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s application seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing a case related to the Delhi excise policy. Kejriwal alleged a conflict of interest because Justice Sharma’s children serve as government panel counsels. In its submission to the Delhi High Court, the CBI argued that accepting this reasoning would disqualify judges nationwide if their relatives hold government legal positions, thereby setting a harmful precedent. The agency asserted that Justice Sharma’s children have never handled matters related to this specific case. Furthermore, the CBI described Kejriwal’s allegations as an afterthought designed to malign the judiciary and highlighted a coordinated online campaign aimed at pressuring the bench. The CBI warned that succumbing to such tactics would encourage unscrupulous litigants to embarrass judges and shift cases strategically, hindering the judicial process. Justice Sharma permitted Kejriwal’s additional affidavit to be recorded but clarified that the hearing would not be reopened as the verdict on the recusal plea had already been reserved. This development underscores the tension between political leadership and judicial independence in high-profile corruption investigations.
The Indian ExpressDelhi HC Records Kejriwal's Affidavit in Judge Recusal Plea
The Delhi High Court has agreed to place on record an additional affidavit submitted by former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who is seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) appeal against his discharge in the Delhi excise policy case. Kejriwal, appearing via videoconferencing, alleged a direct conflict of interest, claiming that Justice Sharma’s children are empanelled Central government lawyers receiving substantial work through the Solicitor General, who represents the CBI. In response, the CBI opposed the plea, arguing that accepting such contentions would disqualify judges nationwide if their relatives serve on government panels. The agency further accused Kejriwal of orchestrating a premeditated and vitriolic online campaign to pressure the judge through misinformation. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta warned that allowing such recusal applications would set a dangerous precedent. This legal development follows a February 27 trial court order discharging Kejriwal and others, which the CBI is currently challenging. The case remains politically sensitive, with Kejriwal asserting he is being prosecuted as a principal political opponent of the ruling central party.
News Today: Breaking News, Top Headlines & Live Updates | The HinduDelhi HC Records Kejriwal's Conflict of Interest Plea Against Judge
The Delhi High Court has formally recorded an additional affidavit filed by Arvind Kejriwal, the AAP national convener and former Delhi Chief Minister, alleging a conflict of interest against Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. Kejriwal contends that the judge’s son and daughter serve as panel counsels for the Central Government, creating a perceived bias in the ongoing liquor policy case where the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is prosecuting him. He cited Right to Information data showing substantial legal work allocated to the judge's family members by the Solicitor General, who represents the CBI in this matter. While acknowledging the submission, Justice Sharma clarified that the hearing would not be reopened, as the verdict on recusal applications from Kejriwal and other accused individuals had already been reserved. The CBI is expected to file written submissions addressing these allegations. Kejriwal emphasized that he was not alleging actual bias but highlighted circumstances that could lead a fair-minded litigant to apprehend injustice, particularly given the political sensitivity of the prosecution involving a key opposition figure.
The Indian Express