“Judges Cannot Be Judged Without Material”: Delhi HC Refuses Recusal In Kejriwal Plea

Delhi High Court judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Monday refused to recuse herself from hearing the liquor policy case , dismissing pleas filed by AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal and other accused seeking her withdrawal from the proceedings.

The matter is linked to the ongoing investigation into the now scrapped Delhi excise policy (2021-22) , probed by the CBI and ED over alleged irregularities in its formulation and implementation. The agencies have claimed that the policy was manipulated to benefit certain private players in exchange for undue gains, allegations denied by the accused.

Delivering a detailed order that lasted over an hour, Justice Sharma said a litigant cannot be allowed to “judge a judge” without any supporting material. She observed that courts cannot be expected to recuse themselves on the basis of unfounded apprehensions of bias or perceived inclinations.

She further stressed that permitting such pleas without evidence could weaken judicial independence. A political leader, she said, cannot be allowed to undermine institutional credibility through unsubstantiated allegations , adding that a personal attack on a judge amounts to an attack on the judiciary itself.

Concluding her remarks, the judge stated that the arguments seeking her recusal were based on conjecture rather than facts . “This court will stand up for itself and the institution. I will not recuse,” she said.

Kejriwal and other applicants, including senior AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak , along with Vijay Nair and Arun Ramchandra Pillai , had objected to her continuing to hear the CBI’s challenge against a trial court order that had discharged them. They cited earlier rulings by the judge, including denial of relief in Kejriwal’s arrest plea and rejection of bail applications of co accused, to argue apprehended bias.

The CBI , represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta , opposed the recusal plea and urged the court to consider contempt action against those making such applications.

The case stems from the controversial excise policy introduced for 2021–22, later withdrawn amid allegations of favouritism and policy manipulation. On February 27, the trial court had discharged Kejriwal and others, observing that the CBI’s case was not sustainable and stood discredited, a decision currently under challenge before the High Court.