The BRICS Times
Arvind Kejriwal, the AAP leader, personally argued his case in the Delhi High Court, requesting the judge to recuse herself from the liquor policy proceedings.
Arvind Kejriwal Presents His Own Legal Defense
In a rare moment for Indian politics, AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal personally argued his case in the Delhi High Court last week. He did not focus on the main excise policy allegations. Instead, he filed a petition asking the presiding judge to step away from the case. This legal move has added a new layer of drama to a long-running political battle.
High Court Decision Expected This Monday
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma is set to deliver her verdict at 4:30 PM this Monday. She must decide if she will continue hearing the case or recuse herself. Justice Sharma has a distinguished career. She graduated from Daulat Ram College and earned her PhD in 2025. She became a magistrate at 24 and a sessions judge at 35.
The Judicial Journey of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma
Over three decades, Justice Sharma has presided over various courts, including family and special CBI courts. She joined the Delhi High Court as a permanent judge in March 2022. Beyond the bench, she is a published author of five books. Her writings include fiction and guides for women. This controversy has now put her career in the national spotlight.
Specific Orders That Triggered the Dispute
The tension began while Justice Sharma heard cases involving the Delhi liquor policy. Initially, she denied bail to several AAP leaders, including Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh. However, a trial court later discharged Kejriwal on February 27, citing a lack of evidence. When the CBI challenged this, Justice Sharma stayed the trial court’s order almost immediately.
Kejriwal Claims Potential Bias and Conflict of Interest
Kejriwal argued that the judge stayed a major trial court order after hearing the CBI for only five minutes. He also pointed out that the judge attended events held by a lawyers’ body linked to the RSS. Furthermore, he alleged a conflict of interest. He claimed the judge’s children are government-empanelled lawyers who receive work through the Solicitor General.
CBI Defends Judge and Opposes Recusal
‘The CBI strongly opposed Kejriwal’s plea, calling his arguments a “dangerous precedent.” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that judges often attend legal events regardless of politics. The agency also clarified that the judge’s children are independent practitioners. They have no involvement in the excise case. The court will now determine if these grounds merit a recusal.
