The on Monday took on record an application filed by seeking recusal of Justice from hearing proceedings arising out of the . During the hearing, Kejriwal informed the Court that he would argue the matter himself, while , appearing for the (CBI), strongly opposed the recusal request, describing the allegations as “baseless” and affecting the institution’s credibility.
The Court directed the respondents to file replies to the recusal application and scheduled further hearing in the matter.
Delhi High Court Takes Recusal Application on Record
The proceedings arose during hearing of the CBI’s challenge to the discharge of Arvind Kejriwal and other accused persons in the Delhi Excise Policy case. During the course of arguments, Kejriwal submitted that he had filed an application seeking recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing the case.
Taking note of the submission, the Bench observed:
This Court takes the application (for recusal) on record. Advance notice of this application was received by the other side. Let them file a reply by tomorrow.
The Court also indicated that if any other parties wished to file similar applications, they were at liberty to do so.
Kejriwal Says He Will Argue the Case in Person
During the hearing, the Bench asked Kejriwal whether he intended to argue the matter personally. Responding to the query, he stated:
I will argue this case myself. I will avail my legal rights. As of now, I have not issued my vakalatnama to anyone.
Kejriwal also raised a procedural issue relating to filing of the recusal application, submitting that under High Court practice, a petitioner appearing in person cannot independently file such an application without the Court’s permission.
The Bench responded by stating that notice would be issued on the application.
Kejriwal appeared before the Court along with his wife, .
Solicitor General Opposes Recusal Plea
Opposing the application, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the allegations made in the recusal request were serious and unfounded. He submitted before the Court:
These kinds of baseless allegations are not coming for the first time. It’s coming for the first time against this institution.
He further stated that such allegations had implications beyond the present proceedings and affected the institutional credibility of the judiciary.
Referring to earlier proceedings, Mehta submitted that attempts had already been made to challenge listing decisions before the Chief Justice and that such approaches should not be repeated in a different form.
He also observed that if Kejriwal intended to argue the case personally, appropriate procedural steps would need to be taken regarding representation.
I have no difficulty if he argues in person. But he will have to discharge his lawyer and say he will argue his case in person. This forum is not for theatrics.
Court Schedules Further Hearing
During the proceedings, the Bench indicated the timeline for the next hearing on the recusal application, observing:
We will hear it on Monday at 2:30.
The Court directed that replies to the application be filed before the next date of hearing.
The matter was subsequently taken up again after lunch as scheduled.
Context: CBI Challenge to Discharge Order in Excise Policy Case
The recusal application arises in proceedings where the CBI has challenged a trial court order discharging Arvind Kejriwal and other accused persons in the Delhi Excise Policy case. The agency has sought reconsideration of the discharge order on grounds that material existed warranting continuation of criminal proceedings.
The Delhi High Court is presently examining the maintainability and merits of the CBI’s challenge.
Significance of the Recusal Application
Applications seeking recusal of judges are considered sensitive within judicial proceedings and are ordinarily examined on limited grounds relating to apprehension of bias or conflict affecting fairness of adjudication. Courts have repeatedly emphasised that such requests must be supported by specific material rather than general allegations.
The present proceedings therefore assume significance not only because they arise in the context of the Delhi Excise Policy investigation but also due to the institutional concerns raised during arguments regarding the nature of allegations made in the recusal request.
The matter will be taken up for further hearing after completion of pleadings on the recusal application and the CBI’s challenge to the discharge order.
