In a major setback to former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, the Delhi High Court on Monday rejected a petition filed by Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and others requesting that Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma step aside from hearing the excise policy case.
The Court ruled that the allegations of partiality lacked any factual basis and held no legal weight.
The Court further noted that such accusations essentially amounted to an effort to tarnish the reputation of the judiciary and, therefore, could not justify a recusal.
Dismissing the petition, the Court emphasised that the functioning of the judicial system must not be swayed by baseless concerns or suspicions.
In a firm and detailed order, Justice Sharma noted that the recusal applications were founded on mere insinuations and unsubstantiated aspersions, rather than any concrete evidence. She ruled that the applicants’ personal fears and suspicions fell short of the legal threshold required for recusal. The judge warned that entertaining such vague claims would create a dangerous precedent.
Justice Sharma described the plea as creating a “catch-22” situation, if the Court recused, it would appear to validate the allegations; if it refused, the outcome could still be questioned later. The Court held that such tactics cannot be permitted, as they risk eroding both the individual judge’s authority and the institution’s credibility. It cautioned that yielding to such pressure could open the floodgates, fostering a perception that judicial decisions can be manipulated through public campaigns or persistent allegations.
Reaffirming the duty of the judiciary, the Court noted that it had, in the past, recused or transferred cases suo motu when a genuine conflict existed. However, it clarified that judicial functions cannot be abdicated merely on the basis of unfounded apprehensions or media criticism.
“The robe this Court wears is not so light,” Justice Sharma remarked, adding that the Court would stand firm not only for itself but for the larger institution of the judiciary.
In conclusion, the Court held that the recusal application was devoid of merit and dismissed it. It warned that allowing such pleas would amount to legitimising baseless allegations against judges and could ultimately result in “justice being managed” rather than impartially delivered.
The matter pertains to the Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22 case, in which the CBI has challenged the discharge of Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and others. With the recusal plea now rejected, the High Court will proceed to hear the case on its merits.
(With inputs from agencies)
