<\/p>\nCourt rejects claims of bias<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
The plea had alleged a perceived conflict of interest and questioned the judge\u2019s impartiality, citing her past orders in the case, participation in certain events, and the professional positions held by her family members. However, the court systematically rejected each of these grounds.On the allegation of ideological bias, Justice Sharma noted that no political statement or conduct had been cited to support such a claim. Addressing her participation in events organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, the court clarified that these were professional and academic interactions attended by several judges and could not be construed as political activity.The court also dismissed concerns regarding her children being empanelled as central government counsel, ruling that no direct connection or \u201cnexus\u201d with the present case had been demonstrated. It stressed that a litigant cannot dictate the professional choices of a judge\u2019s family members in the absence of any evidence of misuse of judicial office.<\/p>\n1. No evidence, only insinuations<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n\n
\n- Court said the plea was based on \u201cconjectures\u201d <\/li>\n
- No material proof was placed to show bias <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
2. Personal apprehensions are not enough<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n\n
\n- Kejriwal\u2019s \u201cdoubts\u201d and \u201cfears\u201d do not meet the legal test <\/li>\n
- Bias must be shown through objective material, not perception <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
3. Presumption of judicial impartiality stands<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n\n
\n- A judge is presumed to be impartial unless clearly proven otherwise <\/li>\n
- This presumption was not rebutted <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
4. Participation in bar events is not bias<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n\n
\n- Events organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad were professional, not political <\/li>\n
- Judges routinely attend legal and academic programmes <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
5. No conflict of interest established<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n\n
\n- Allegation regarding judge\u2019s children on government panel rejected <\/li>\n
- Court said no \u201cnexus\u201d with the case was shown <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
6. Children\u2019s right to practice law protected<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n\n
\n- Court held judges\u2019 family members cannot be barred from legal profession <\/li>\n
- That would violate their fundamental rights <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
7. Prior favourable orders were not objected to<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n\n
\n- AAP did not raise bias allegations when earlier interim reliefs were granted <\/li>\n
- Challenge came only after adverse proceedings began<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
8. Judges cannot be influenced by political statements<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n\n
\n- Court said it has no control over remarks made by politicians outside court <\/li>\n
- Such statements cannot form basis for recusal<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
\u2018Courtroom cannot become theatre of perception\u2019<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
In one of the sharpest observations in the order, the court cautioned against turning judicial proceedings into a \u201ctheatre of perception,\u201d stating that justice cannot be influenced by narratives or subjective apprehensions.\u201cA litigant cannot be allowed to put the judiciary on trial,\u201d the judge said, adding that even a powerful political figure cannot level allegations against a sitting judge without substantiating them with material evidence.The court further noted that accepting such pleas would open the \u201cfloodgates\u201d for attempts to delay proceedings or engage in forum shopping by targeting judges through unverified claims.<\/p>\nPrior orders not grounds for recusal<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
Kejriwal had also pointed to earlier orders passed by Justice Sharma in the excise case and related matters. Rejecting this argument, the court clarified that adverse rulings cannot form the basis for recusal. It emphasised that judicial decisions are subject to scrutiny by higher courts, not by litigants seeking a change of bench.The judgment underscored that recusal is governed by well-established legal principles and requires a clear demonstration of reasonable apprehension of bias\u2014something the court found entirely lacking in this case.<\/p>\nStrong defence of judicial independence<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
Justice Sharma highlighted the broader implications of entertaining such pleas, observing that they could undermine not just an individual judge but the institution itself. She described the situation as a \u201ccatch-22,\u201d where recusal would validate baseless allegations, while refusal could invite further criticism.\u201cThe robe this court wears is not so light,\u201d she remarked, asserting that judicial functions cannot be surrendered under pressure or public perception. The court reiterated that \u201callegations, however persistent, cannot take the place of proof.\u201d<\/p>\nSeparate recusal in another matter<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
In a related but separate development, Justice Sharma recused herself from hearing a bail plea filed by former AAP MLA Naresh Balyan in a case under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act. The matter has been directed to be listed before another bench on April 23.<\/p>\nPolitical reactions<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
Kejriwal, who is currently campaigning in Tamil Nadu alongside Chief Minister M. K. Stalin, declined to comment on the High Court\u2019s order, stating that he had not yet read the judgment.Meanwhile, BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj launched a sharp attack, accusing the AAP chief of attempting to pressure the judiciary and calling the plea politically motivated.<\/p>\nBackground of the case<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n
The case relates to alleged irregularities in the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy 2021\u201322, which is under investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation. A trial court had earlier discharged Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and others, a decision that has been challenged before the High Court.With the recusal plea now dismissed, the High Court is set to proceed with hearing the case on its merits, marking the next phase in the high-profile legal battle. <\/div>\n
\n
Source link <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal NEW DELHI: In a strongly worded judgment reinforcing judicial independence, the Delhi high court on Monday refused to allow a plea by Arvind Kejriwal seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing the Delhi excise policy case, holding that the allegations were \u201cbased on conjectures and insinuations\u201d and fell […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6573,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[150],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-6572","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-delhi"},"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6572","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6572"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6572\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6573"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6572"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6572"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/banitoday.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6572"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"\u2018You](\"https:\/\/static.toiimg.com\/thumb\/msid-130413418,imgsize-30492,width-400,height-225,resizemode-72\/aap-chief-arvind-kejriwal.jpg\" "\\"AAP")
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n