Excise case: Delhi HC to hear Kejriwal’s plea for judge’s recusal on Monday
text_fields
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court will on Monday hear a plea by former chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and others seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing a Central Bureau of Investigation petition challenging their discharge in the excise policy case.
The plea, scheduled for hearing at 2:30 pm, will be argued before Justice Sharma herself. On April 6, the judge had taken Kejriwal’s application on record and listed it for April 13.
Kejriwal has sought the judge’s recusal on the grounds of a “grave, bona fide and reasonable apprehension” that proceedings before her may not be impartial or neutral. Similar applications have been filed by Aam Aadmi Party leaders Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak, along with other respondents, including Vijay Nair and Arun Ramchandra Pillai.
On February 27, a trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others in the case, criticising the Central Bureau of Investigation for presenting a case that was unable to withstand judicial scrutiny and stood discredited in its entirety.
Subsequently, on March 9, Justice Sharma issued notices to all 23 accused on the CBI’s plea against the discharge, observing that certain findings of the trial court at the stage of framing charges appeared prima facie erroneous and warranted further consideration. She also stayed the trial court’s recommendation to initiate departmental action against the investigating officer in the case.
Earlier, Delhi High Court Chief Justice D. K. Upadhyaya declined Kejriwal’s request to transfer the matter to another bench, stating that any decision on recusal must be taken by the judge concerned.
Opposing the plea, the Central Bureau of Investigation argued that the request was based on “frivolous and baseless” claims. It said that attending a legal seminar organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, an RSS-affiliated lawyers’ body, did not indicate any ideological bias.
The agency further contended that making “unscrupulous” and “sweeping” allegations of bias amounted to an attempt to undermine the court’s authority and interfere with the administration of justice, potentially constituting contempt of court. It also asserted that judicial decisions cannot be grounds for alleging bias and described the plea as an instance of “forum shopping.”
With PTI inputs