Kejriwal & Sisodia Set to Return to Delhi HC Excise Policy Battle After Judge Steps Away

After months of courtroom drama a rejected recusal bid, a Satyagraha standoff and a contempt row Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia may finally re-enter the Delhi HC excise policy proceedings, now that the case has shifted to a new judge.

A New Bench, A Fresh Start

The Delhi High Court’s excise policy case one of India’s most closely watched legal battles got a dramatic reset last week. The CBI’s petition challenging the trial court’s decision to discharge AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy CM Manish Sisodia and 21 others now sits before Justice Manoj Jain. The case reached him after Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma stepped away from the matter a move that followed weeks of bitter controversy between the bench and the AAP leadership.

Justice Jain listed the matter for hearing on May 25 and made one thing clear from the start everyone must show up. “Let them be intimated that the case has been allocated to this court. So if they have to say anything or respond to the present petition let them be served. Once everybody is here, we will draw a schedule of hearing,” the judge said plainly.

The Boycott That Triggered a Firestorm

To understand why this bench change matters, one needs to go back a few weeks. After the trial court discharged all 23 accused on February 27 ruling the case “wholly unable to survive judicial scrutiny” the CBI moved the Delhi High Court to challenge that order. The revision petition first went before Justice Sharma.

Kejriwal, Sisodia and party colleague Durgesh Pathak then raised a red flag they sought Justice Sharma’s recusal, saying they had serious apprehensions of bias and conflict of interest. On April 20, the High Court flatly rejected those applications. That is when things got truly unusual.

The three AAP leaders wrote directly to Justice Sharma, saying they would no longer appear personally or through counsel. They invoked the spirit of non-cooperation, describing their stance as following “Mahatma Gandhi’s path of Satyagraha.” It was a striking and deeply unconventional stand inside a courtroom one that set off a chain reaction of consequences.

Contempt Proceedings Erupt Then Comes the Transfer

Justice Sharma did not let the matter rest. On May 14, she initiated criminal contempt proceedings against Kejriwal, Sisodia and other AAP leaders. The charge that they had been spreading “vilifying and defamatory” content on social media targeting the judiciary in connection with the excise policy case. The same day, she also announced the case would move to another bench.

A separate Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja has since issued notices to Kejriwal, Sisodia, Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh and other AAP leaders including Saurabh Bharadwaj and Vinay Mishra in those criminal contempt proceedings. That bench directed the High Court Registry to preserve all electronic records and social media posts. The contemnors now have four weeks to respond, and the contempt matter has been listed for August 4.

CBI Presses Hard for Speed

At the May 19 hearing before Justice Jain, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the CBI and pulled no punches. He argued that the trial court’s discharge order “cannot withstand scrutiny of any court in the eyes of law.” He also pushed hard for the hearings to move quickly, arguing the case involves a “scam in the capital of the nation” and that delay was not an option.

Mehta added that all the accused had been served notices multiple times and had repeatedly been given opportunities to file replies but had still not done so.

A Judge Who Wants All Parties Present

Justice Jain took note of the fact that Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak remain unrepresented before his court. He deferred the hearing to May 25 giving the trio a formal window to engage. “Ideal scenario is that everybody is here and everybody is heard,” the judge remarked. “They should be here, duly represented by a counsel. We can take this matter further.”

The judge also noted that the bench change had already been widely reported and respondents were likely aware of it but said procedural fairness demanded formal notice all the same. “We will not shy away from sending them fresh notice now the case is before this court and if you have anything to say, please tell us,” he added.

The CBI confirmed it would inform Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak as directed.

What Lies Ahead

The excise policy case which began with the Delhi government’s 2021-22 liquor policy being scrapped amid allegations of kickbacks and irregular licensing has twisted through arrests, bail fights, charge sheets, a full discharge and now a High Court challenge. The CBI maintains the policy was manipulated to benefit select liquor traders in exchange for payments to an alleged cartel called the “South Group.”

With the bench now reset and fresh notices issued, May 25 becomes a key date one that could determine whether Kejriwal and Sisodia decide to re-engage with the proceedings or continue their judicial standoff under a changed set of circumstances.