Delhi High Court Issues Notice on Kejriwal’s Plea Seeking Judge’s Recusal in CBI Case

The Delhi High Court on Monday issued notice to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on an application filed by former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) supremo Arvind Kejriwal, seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing a case related to the alleged liquor policy scam.

The matter pertains to the CBI’s petition challenging a trial court order that discharged Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and several other accused persons in a corruption case linked to the now-scrapped excise policy. The High Court is currently hearing the agency’s plea against that discharge.

At the outset of the hearing, Kejriwal, who appeared in person, informed the court that he had filed an application requesting Justice Sharma to recuse herself from the case. He urged the court to take the application on record, noting procedural limitations faced by litigants appearing in person, particularly with respect to e-filing.

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, representing the CBI, strongly objected to the recusal plea. He informed the court that as many as seven applications had been filed seeking Justice Sharma’s recusal, calling the situation “very serious.” Mehta criticized what he described as a growing tendency among certain individuals to level serious allegations against judicial institutions. “There are allegations against the institution and we will support the institution,” he said.

While clarifying that the agency had no objection to Kejriwal arguing the matter in person, Mehta raised concerns about procedural consistency. He pointed out that Kejriwal had already engaged legal counsel and had not formally discharged his lawyer. “If he chooses to appear in person, then his lawyer should not appear. He must continue accordingly,” Mehta submitted.

He further suggested that if other parties intended to file similar recusal applications, they should be given a week to do so, so that all such pleas could be addressed together. Mehta also cautioned that if the recusal applications were ultimately rejected, it could raise issues of contempt of court.

Responding to the objections, Kejriwal reiterated that his application had been filed in accordance with established High Court procedures and requested that it be formally taken on record. When asked by the court whether he intended to argue the application himself, Kejriwal replied in the affirmative.

Taking note of the submissions, the court directed that the application be placed on record and issued notice to the CBI. It also allowed parties to file replies and written submissions. The court observed that any additional recusal applications could be filed within the stipulated time so that they could be decided comprehensively.

The High Court has listed the matter for further hearing on April 13 at 2:30 PM. It was also informed during the proceedings that a writ petition filed before the Supreme Court seeking transfer of the case to another bench had been withdrawn.

Notably, the trial court had, on February 27, discharged all 23 accused persons in the case, including Kejriwal and Sisodia, while also making critical observations regarding the CBI’s investigation. The case has remained politically sensitive, especially as Kejriwal was arrested during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections and later granted bail after spending 156 days in custody. Sisodia, meanwhile, had spent over 500 days in custody before securing relief.

📌 Follow us on YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter for more updates.