Ex CM vs HC Judge: What Triggered the Unexpected Face-Off?

Former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal sough recusal of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma in the liquor policy case, which led to a major political debate. The AAP President made the request when he appeared in the court and personally argued on the CBI’s petition, which challenged his acquittal in the liquor scam case.

He sought the recusal on the grounds that Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma passed the March 9 order, the first day of hearing in CBI’s plea, in a haste.

During the hearing, Kejriwal said that Sharma partially stayed the trial court judgement, and said that the trial court’ observations were erroneous and needed reconsideration. Justice Sharma stayed the recommendation to initiate departmental proceedings against the CBI officer probing the scam.

Kejriwal said that he had doubts whether the court is biased and if he would get justice in the High Court. Kejriwal argued the case for nearly an hour and pointed out that Justice Sharma’s orders favored the CBI and the ED in five cases. He claimed that her handling of CBI matters shows a trend leaning towards the CBI and the ED.

Kejriwal also said that Justice Sharma attended events organized by ABVP, affiliated to the RSS, not once but four times. In Hindi, Kejriwal said that they were oppose to their ideology and the liquor scam case being a political one, could create an impression of being biased.

To this, Justice Sharma responded and asked whether she had made any ideological or political statements during those events. Kejriwal said merely attending the events was sufficient grounds for concern.

The AAP chief’s argument sparked a debate over recusal standards in political cases.