- Arvind Kejriwal withdraws from proceedings, citing loss of faith.
- He will not appear in person or through counsel.
- Kejriwal reserves right to appeal adverse orders to Supreme Court.
- Recusal plea against Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma was rejected.
Aam Aadmi Party supremo Arvind Kejriwal on Monday said he will not appear before the Delhi High Court judge Swarana Kanta Sharma, either in person or through legal counsel, stating that he has lost faith in receiving justice in the matter.
In a letter addressed to Justice Sharma, the former Delhi Chief Minister said his “hope of getting justice” from the judge had been “shattered”.
Kejriwal stated that he would not participate in the proceedings before the judge going forward. He also indicated that he would reserve the right to challenge any adverse order before the Supreme Court.
“My hope of getting justice from Justice Swarn Kanta is shattered. Therefore, I have decided to follow Gandhiji’s Satyagraha. I have made a decision based on the voice of my conscience. I will reserve the right to appeal Justice Swarn Kanta’s decision in the Supreme Court.”
ALSO READ | BJP-TMC Workers Clash In North 24 Parganas Ahead Of PM’s Visit; 3 Injured In Bombing At MLA’s Residence
Kejriwal’s Recusal Plea Rejected
The development comes days after the Delhi High Court declined a plea by Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and others seeking the recusal of Justice Sharma from hearing matters related to the excise policy case.
On April 20, the court dismissed the request, allowing the judge to continue presiding over the proceedings.
In a detailed order, Justice Sharma said she chose to decide the application on merits rather than recuse, noting that doing so upheld institutional integrity. She emphasised that judicial impartiality is presumed unless proven otherwise with credible evidence, and cannot be questioned based on mere apprehensions or perceptions of a litigant.
The court dismissed allegations of bias against the judge, including claims related to her participation in professional events and the empanelment of her relatives as government counsel. It held that no material was presented to establish any conflict of interest or political inclination.
Addressing references to past rulings, the judge clarified that decisions being modified or relief granted by higher courts do not imply bias or misconduct.
ALSO READ | Delhi Sizzles At 45°C Amid Heatwave; Rain, Thunderstorm Likely Today
Justice Sharma also observed that objections to a judge’s conduct cannot be selective, pointing out that no concerns were raised when earlier orders had favoured AAP leaders, including Manish Sisodia and others. Accepting such recusal pleas, she warned, could have wider constitutional implications and risk undermining public confidence in the judiciary.
The excise policy case has been a major legal and political flashpoint involving several senior AAP leaders. Kejriwal’s latest move signals an escalation in his legal stance, even as the matter remains under judicial consideration.
Before You Go
BREAKING: FBI Reaches California Home of Trump Shooter as Probe Intensifies
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: abplive.com
