The Delhi High Court has reserved its order on a plea filed by former Delhi Chief Minister and AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal, seeking the recusal of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma in the excise policy case.
Kejriwal has also approached the Supreme Court of India, challenging the Delhi High Court Chief Justice's decision rejecting his request to transfer the case from Justice Sharma, according to Bar and Bench. During Monday's hearing, Kejriwal, along with former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, addressed the court on their recusal plea.
Who Is Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma? Delhi HC Judge Accused Of Attending RSS Events 4 Times By Kejriwal
Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma, a judge of the Delhi High Court, graduated with a BA (Hons.) in English Literature from Delhi University. She obtained her LL.B. in 1991 and completed her LL.M. in 2004, and also holds a diploma in Marketing Management, Advertising, and Public Relations. She began her judicial career at the age of 24 as a Magistrate, became a Sessions Judge at 35, and was elevated as a permanent judge of the Delhi High Court on March 28, 2022.
Earlier on April 13, Kejriwal urged Justice Sharma to recuse herself from hearing the CBI's appeal in the excise policy case, citing a "real, grave and reasonable apprehension" of bias. He alleged that her attendance at events organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad — which he described as affiliated with the RSS — raised concerns about impartiality.
Kejriwal argued that perception plays a crucial role in a functioning democracy, questioning whether an individual holding opposing ideological views could expect a fair hearing. "If I am from the opposite ideology, will I get justice?" he asked in court, while clarifying that he was not making a direct allegation but expressing apprehension.
Justice Sharma responded to his submissions, at one point remarking that she would only record the arguments presented.
Kejriwal further claimed that the excise policy case was political in nature and alleged selective urgency in cases involving Opposition leaders. He also raised concerns over earlier proceedings, including a March 9 order, which he said was passed after a brief hearing.
Referring to prior developments, he noted that a trial court had discharged him, Sisodia and others in the case, while criticising the investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation. He argued that the agency's case relied heavily on approver statements and cited past remarks describing the CBI as a "caged parrot" to question its independence.
During the hearing, Kejriwal maintained that even an apprehension of bias is sufficient ground for recusal and said such concerns should be considered from the perspective of the litigant.
After concluding his submissions, he sought permission to leave the court. Justice Sharma acknowledged his arguments, remarking that he had argued well.
The Central Bureau of Investigation, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, opposed the plea, calling it baseless and filing a formal response against the application.
The court has now reserved its order on the matter.
