In a fresh development before the Delhi High Court, former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has filed an additional affidavit seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing the excise policy case. The plea raises concerns over a perceived conflict of interest involving the judge’s family.
Background of the Case
The matter relates to the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) challenge to the discharge of Kejriwal and others in the Delhi excise policy case. Earlier, Justice Sharma had reserved orders on recusal applications filed by the accused. Kejriwal, appearing in person, had initially raised the issue during arguments and later supported it with documents.
In his new affidavit, Kejriwal pointed out that the judge’s children are empanelled as Central Government counsel and receive case assignments through the office of the Solicitor General, who is representing the CBI in the present case.
He stated,
“This gives rise to a direct and serious appearance of conflict of interest,” emphasizing that the same legal establishment prosecuting him is also linked to professional assignments involving the judge’s immediate family.
Referring to documents obtained through RTI, Kejriwal claimed that a significant number of government cases were allotted to the judge’s son between 2023 and 2025. He argued that such facts should have been disclosed at the outset by the prosecution.
Importantly, he clarified that he was not alleging actual bias. “I am not attributing any improper motive… but the circumstances create a reasonable apprehension,” he submitted.
Kejriwal also raised procedural concerns, stating he was denied a fair opportunity to present rejoinder arguments.
“The proceedings continued beyond 7:00 PM… I was effectively denied a reasonable opportunity to respond,” he said.
While the Court has not yet delivered its ruling, the bench had earlier heard extensive submissions from both sides and reserved orders on the recusal plea.
The Delhi High Court is yet to pronounce its decision on the recusal application and the issues raised in the additional affidavit.
