On Monday, Delhi High Court Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma declined to step aside from the Delhi liquor policy case, dismissing claims of bias presented by Aam Aadmi Party leader Arvind Kejriwal. She emphasized that judicial officers remain unaffected by political influences.
Kejriwal requested Justice Sharma’s removal from a Central Bureau of Investigation appeal in the case, expressing concerns about potential lack of fairness and neutrality in the hearings.
In a detailed ruling, Justice Sharma denied the request, condemning efforts to erode trust in the judiciary and noting that Kejriwal provided no evidence of any politically biased statements from her.
She stated that judges are presumed impartial, and any challenge to this must be supported by the party seeking removal.
Justice Sharma viewed the requests as an attempt to scrutinize the judiciary itself. She affirmed that her decision was made independently and without external influence.
Regarding her involvement in events hosted by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, she explained these were non-political gatherings focused on new criminal legislation, women’s issues, or mentoring young lawyers, attended by various judges, and not indicative of any bias.
On claims of conflict due to her children serving on a government legal panel, she noted no direct link to the case was demonstrated, and her family members had no involvement in the liquor policy matter.
She argued that preventing judges’ relatives from practicing law would infringe on basic rights, drawing parallels to family members in politics.
Justice Sharma rejected the idea that repeated false claims could become valid, whether in court or online, and dismissed fears of unfavorable rulings as grounds for recusal.
She described the situation as a dilemma where either choice could invite criticism, but recusing would imply judicial alignment with politics, which she refused to endorse.
The judge observed that the recusal application contained unsubstantiated doubts about her fairness rather than solid proof.
She acknowledged that withdrawing might have been simpler but would represent a failure of duty and submission to pressure.
Case Background: On February 27, a lower court acquitted Kejriwal and 22 others in the liquor policy matter. The CBI appealed this, and Justice Sharma has issued notices while halting trial court orders for actions against the investigator. She also
