Delhi High Court will today hear a petition filed by former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and other discharged leaders in the excise policy case. Plea seeks recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing Central Bureau of Investigation challenge.
The Delhi High Court will Today hear a petition filed by former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and other leaders who were discharged in the liquor policy case.
The plea seeks the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing a CBI petition that challenges the trial court’s decision.
Kejriwal will argue the matter, which is listed for hearing at 2:30 pm, before Justice Sharma.
Earlier, On April 6, the judge had taken Kejriwal’s application for recusal on record and scheduled it for hearing on April 13.
Kejriwal has asked that Justice Sharma step aside, saying there is “a grave, bona fide and reasonable apprehension” that the proceedings in the case before her would not be impartial and neutral.
Apart from Kejriwal, AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak have also filed applications seeking the judge’s recusal. Other respondents including Vijay Nair and Arun Ramchandra Pillai have submitted similar requests.
Earlier, on February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others in the excise policy case. The court also criticised the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), observing that its case was “wholly unable to survive judicial scrutiny” and had “stood discredited in its entirety”.
On March 9, Justice Sharma issued notice to all 23 accused on the CBI’s plea challenging their discharge. She said that certain observations and findings made by the trial court at the stage of framing of charges “prima facie appeared erroneous” and required consideration.
She also stayed the trial court’s recommendation to initiate departmental action against the CBI investigating officer in the liquor policy matter.
Subsequently, Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court D K Upadhyaya declined Kejriwal’s request to transfer the CBI plea away from Justice Sharma and to another judge, stating that the decision on recusal must be taken by the judge concerned.
In its response opposing the recusal applications, the CBI has argued that Kejriwal and others cannot seek Justice Sharma’s recusal simply because she attended a “legal seminar” organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, described as an RSS-affiliated confederation of lawyers, since this does not show any ideological association.
Also Read: Probe Against Manish Sisodia & Satyendar Jain | President Droupadi Murmu Grants Sanction
The CBI further contended that “unscrupulous” and “sweeping” allegations of bias based on attending legal seminars where, it said, the seminar had no political topic amount to an effort to “scandalise” and undermine the court’s authority, and to interfere with the administration of justice, which it said amounts to contempt of court.
It also asserted that the recusal request is founded on “frivolous and baseless averments and is wholly vexatious”.
The agency added that judicial observations made by a judge in a legal decision cannot, by themselves, be treated as grounds to allege bias. It also said the request amounts to “forum shopping”.