Delhi High Court Issues Notice On Arvind Kejriwal's Plea Seeking Recusal Of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma From Liquor Policy Case

The Delhi High Court on Monday (April 06) issued notice to the CBI on former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party supremo Arvind Kejriwal's application seeking recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who is presently hearing CBI's petition challenging his discharge in the corruption case related to the alleged liquor policy scam.

The court was hearing CBI's plea challenging the trial court's order discharging Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and various others who were booked in the case.

At the outset, the former CM, who appeared in person, submitted before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma that he had filed a recusal application which may be taken on record.

However, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CBI, objected, stating that he had received seven applications seeking Justice Sharma's recusal. "This is very serious.Some people in this country make career out of making serious allegations. There are allegations against the institution and we will support the institution," he said.

The SG added that the agency has no problem with Kejriwal appearing and arguing in person. However, "he also has engaged a lawyer. He has not discharged the lawyer. In case he has to appear, his lawyer cannot appear and henceforth he should only appear" the SG said.

“If anyone else wants to join, they can be given one week and every one should appear together. If your lordships are pleased to allow recusal application, atleast pleadings have to be completed. Except 1-2 persons no one has filed reply. In case recusal applications are to be rejected, this will be contempt of court,” he added.

Kejriwal at this point submitted that he filed the recusal application as per High Court procedure and requested that the plea be taken on record as the petitioner in person is not allowed to do e-filing.

The court then orally asked Kejriwal if he was going to argue his application himself, to which he responded in the affirmative. Following this, the Court issued notice and said,

"Respondent no. 18 (Kejriwal) appears in person. This court takes this application on record. Registry may take it on record digitally. Copy received. Reply, if any, be filed. Advance copy be served. Both parties may file written submissions. If anyone else wants to file application for recusal, please do that so that I can decide it once and for all".

The court thereafter listed the matter on April 13 at 2:30 pm. The court was also informed that the writ filed before Supreme Court with prayer for transfer of the case to another bench has been withdrawn.

Justice Sharma also issued notice on recusal applications filed by other accused persons.

For context, Kejriwal had written to the Chief Justice of High Court seeking transfer of the case from Justice Sharma to another judge. However, the request was declined. The AAP leader then moved the Supreme Court for transfer by way of filing a petition under Article 32 of Constitution of India.

On February 27, the trial court discharged all the 23 accused persons in the case, including political leaders Kejriwal, Sisodia and K Kavitha. The trial court had also severely criticised the CBI's investigation in the case.

It may be noted that the case had become politically controversial, as Kejriwal was arrested and remanded to the custody amidst the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. He was later granted bail by the Supreme Court after 156 days of custody. AAP leader Manish Sisodia also spent 530 days in custody in the case.

The CBI's revision against the trial court's order was heard by Justice Sharma, who on March 9, prima facie observed that the trial court's observations were prima facie erroneous.

The AAP Chief later wrote to the Chief Justice seeking change of the Judge, saying that no specific reason was recorded to comment against the trial court's order. Kejriwal also stated that the Justice Sharma had earlier refused bail to many accused in the liquor policy case, and the Supreme Court had later granted them relief.

The AAP leader has sought transfer on the ground of a "grave, bona fide, and reasonable apprehension that the matter may not receive a hearing marked by impartiality and neutrality".

Kejriwal has also filed a separate Special Leave Petition challenging Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma's observations against the trial court's order.

The excise policy was framed by the Delhi Government to boost revenue and reform liquor trade in 2021, which was later withdrawn after allegations of irregularities in implementation were made and Lieutenant-Governor Vinay Kumar Saxena ordered a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation into the policy.

This policy – which sought to completely privatise liquor trade in the national capital – was used to grant undue advantage to private entities at the cost of the public exchequer and smacked of corruption, the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation claimed.

Manish Sisodia was first arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation in a case related to the excise policy on February 26, 2023 and later by the Enforcement Directorate on March 9, 2023. In the first information report (FIR) registered by the CBI, Sisodia and others have been accused of being instrumental in 'recommending' and 'taking decisions' regarding the 2021-22 excise policy, “without the approval of competent authority with an intention to extend undue favours to the licensee post tender”.

The central agency also claimed that the AAP leader was arrested because he gave evasive replies and refused to cooperate with the investigation, despite being confronted with evidence.

The AAP chief (Kejriwal) was formally arrested by CBI on June 26, 2024, while he was in custody of the Enforcement Directorate in the money laundering case arising out of the alleged liquor policy scam.

Case Title: CBI v. Kuldeep Singh & Ors