Delhi High Court CJ Rejects Arvind Kejriwal's Plea To Transfer CBI's Excise Policy Case From Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma

The Delhi High Court's Chief Justice rejected AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal's request to transfer CBI's excise policy case from Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma to another bench. Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya has said that CBI's petition is assigned to Justice Sharma as per current roster and that any request for recusal has to be taken by the judge concerned.“I, however, do not find any reason to transfer the petition by passing an order on the administrative side," the Court said. The AAP Supremo had sought transfer of the CBI's criminal petition challenging his discharge in the case. Kejriwal is one of the respondents in the matter.The matter was listed before Justice Sharma on March 9, who had issued notice on the plea filed by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the discharge of Aam Aadmi Party supremo Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and others in the corruption case related to the alleged liquor policy scam.In doing so the high court had also said that the trial court observations made while discharging AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and all other accused in the liquor policy case regarding statements of witnesses and the approvers, at charge stage, are “prima facie erroneous and need consideration.”The AAP Chief has said that the March 9 order does not disclose reasons as to the "specific perversity" in the trial court observations. It further states that the concerned bench has already decided multiple matters arising from the excise policy case recording prima facie observations and had dismissed the petitions filed by the accused persons. It states that Supreme Court has granted relief to the accused persons. He states that his submission is not directed to any personal predilection but only to test of a reasonable apprehension in the mind of a fair minded and informed litigant. 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".For context, the trial court had found that allegations against Kejriwal were based on statements of co-accused or witnesses, but there was no independent corroboration connecting him to any criminal conspiracy.Moreover, it had observed that the CBI repeatedly re-record statements of the approver over an extended period, "ostensibly to fill gaps, improve the prosecution narrative, implicate additional accused, or artificially weave missing links in the chain of circumstances.”Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma had said, "certain factual discrepancies pointed out in the impugned order, the observations made by the learned Trial Court regarding statements of the witnesses and the approvers, at the stage of charge itself, prima facie appear erroneous, and need consideration.The judge had added that scathing remarks made against the CBI Investigating Officer that he abused his official position to conduct unfair investigation, are prima facie “foundationally misconceived especially when made at the stage of charge itself.”In view of the above, the judge had stayed the observations made against the Investigating Officer, including the direction recommending departmental action against him.In the meantime, the Court requested the Trial Court where the proceedings on money laundering are pending, to adjourn the case to a date, later than the date fixed before the High Court, and await the outcome of CBI's plea.On February 27, the trial court discharged all the 23 accused persons in the case, including political leaders Kejriwal, Sisodia and K Kavitha.All who have been discharged are Kuldeep Singh, Narender Singh, Vijay Nair, Abhishek Boinpally, Arun Pillai, Mootha Gautam, Sameer Mahendru, Manish Sisodia, Amandeep Singh Dhall, Arjun Pandey, Butchibabu Gorantla, Rajesh Joshi, Damodar Prasad Sharma, Prince Kumar, Arvind Kumar Singh, Chanpreet Singh, K Kavitha, Arvind Kejriwal, Durgesh Pathak, Amit Arora, Vinod Chauhan, Ashish Chand Mathur and Sarath Reddy.The Trial Court, in strong words, had rapped the CBI for lapses in investigation and said that the “voluminous chargesheet” has many lacunae not supported by any witness or statement.It said that the CBI failed to make out a prima facie case against Sisodia. The Special CBI Judge had added Kejriwal was implicated without any cogent material.For context, Sisodia was in jail for approximately 530 days.Arvind Kejriwal spent approximately 156 days in jail across two periods. He was finally released on September 13, 2024, after the Supreme Court granted him bail in the CBI case, having already received interim bail in the ED case.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...

Delhi High Court CJ Rejects Arvind Kejriwal's Plea To Transfer CBI's Excise Policy Case From Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags