Today, On 14th May, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court said she will begin contempt proceedings against accused in the excise policy case for defamatory social media remarks. She added that others spreading vilifying statements about her will also face legal action.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court said that she will initiate contempt of court proceedings against certain accused in the excise policy case, as well as other individuals, for allegedly making defamatory and vilifying statements about her on social media.
Justice Sharma did not provide additional details, but said she will issue a comprehensive order on the matter at 5:00 pm on the same day.
Justice Sharma is currently hearing the plea filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which challenges a trial court order that discharged all 23 accused in the excise policy case, including Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and others.
Earlier, Kejriwal, Sisodia, and Pathak had sought Justice Sharma’s recusal. However, Justice Sharma rejected their request on April 20.
The judge, in that order, said,
“A politician cannot be allowed to sow seeds of mistrust and that the application seeking her recusal amounted to putting the judiciary on trial.”
Earlier, Arvind Kejriwal, National Convenor of the AAP, has written to Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma stating that he will not appear before her, either in person or through his lawyers.
Arvind Kejriwal, the former Chief Minister of Delhi, said he will not appear before Delhi High Court judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who is hearing a plea challenging his acquittal in the excise policy case.
In a letter to the judge, Kejriwal said he has lost faith in her ability to deliver justice. His letter comes days after Justice Sharma rejected a recusal plea filed by Kejriwal in the matter.
Kejriwal accused the judge of having a conflict of interest, alleging that Justice Sharma’s children who work as panel lawyers for the central government have professional links with Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who is appearing against him in the case.
The matter originates from a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) appeal against a trial court order that had earlier acquitted Kejriwal and several other accused in the excise policy case.
The High Court issued notice on the CBI’s petition and indicated that some observations made by the lower court appeared, at least at first sight, to be flawed leading to renewed legal proceedings.
However, Kejriwal has consistently argued that the case is politically driven and has repeatedly raised concerns about the fairness of the process.
Earlier, Arvind Kejriwal has filed an application before the Delhi High Court seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. Through this application, Kejriwal has requested that Justice Sharma should not hear the case.
Additionally, Kejriwal’s this move comes a few days after Justice Sharma refused to step aside from the Delhi excise policy matter, dismissing the AAP leader’s allegations of bias and conflict of interest.
In a sharply worded ruling, the court reaffirmed the principle of judicial independence and rejected the contention that the proceedings would be unfair or lack impartiality.
Justice Sharma said while pronouncing her decision,
“My oath is to the Constitution. My oath has taught me that justice does not bend under pressure. Justice does not yield to any pressure. I will decide and adjudicate fearlessly without any bias. I will not recuse from this case,”
She also said there is a presumption that judges act impartially, and that such a presumption can be overturned only by concrete evidence something she noted was missing from Kejriwal’s application.
Previously, On February 27, the trial court acquitted all 23 accused persons in the case, including prominent political leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and K Kavitha.
The court also strongly criticised the CBI’s investigation.
It may be noted that the matter took on a political dimension, particularly because Kejriwal was arrested and sent to judicial custody during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. He was later granted bail by the Supreme Court after 156 days in custody.
Similarly, Manish Sisodia spent 530 days in jail in connection with the case.
The CBI’s revision against the trial court’s order was heard by Justice Sharma, who on March 9 made a prima facie observation that the trial court’s remarks were erroneous.
Click Here to Read More On Arvind Kejriwal