The Delhi High Court on Monday reserved its judgment on a plea filed by former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing the Central Bureau of Investigation’s appeal in the Delhi excise policy case.
Kejriwal, who is also the national convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party, appeared in person and argued his application before the court. As proceedings concluded, Justice Sharma remarked that Kejriwal had “argued well” and possessed the potential to become a lawyer. In response, Kejriwal stated that he had already found his “calling” and was content with it.
While reserving the order, Justice Sharma observed that this was the first instance in her judicial career where a recusal request had been made against her. She noted that the proceedings had provided her with deeper insight into recusal jurisprudence and expressed hope of delivering a well-reasoned judgment.
During his submissions, Kejriwal raised concerns regarding perceived bias, stating that Justice Sharma frequently hears appeals filed by central agencies such as the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate. He argued that prior observations in related proceedings had, in his view, created an impression of prejudgment.
“I was almost declared guilty. I was almost declared corrupt—only the sentence remained,” Kejriwal submitted, asserting that his plea was grounded in a “real, grave, and reasonable apprehension” of not receiving a fair hearing. He cited judicial precedents, including the Kanak Lata case, to support his argument that strong prior observations could justify such apprehensions.
Kejriwal also referenced earlier proceedings in which relief, including bail, had been denied to him, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and K. Kavitha. Additionally, he pointed to Justice Sharma’s participation in events organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, which he claimed has ideological links to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, as part of the grounds for his apprehension.
The court is expected to deliver its judgment on the recusal plea in due course.
.png)
The opinions posted here do not belong to 🔰www.indiansdaily.com. The author is solely responsible for the opinions.
As per the IT policy of the Central Government, insults against an individual, community, religion or country, defamatory and inflammatory remarks, obscene and vulgar language are punishable offenses. Legal action will be taken for such expressions of opinion.