Arvind Kejriwal In Trouble? Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Recuses From Liquor Case But Takes Big Action

Arvind Kejriwal In Legal Trouble: In an unprecedented move, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court on Thursday, May 14, transferred the excise policy case after initiating criminal contempt of court action against the former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and other accused persons for posting “vilifying”, “defamatory” and “contemptuous” contents online in connection with the court’s proceedings in the matter. It may be mentioned that while transferring the matter, Justice Sharma clarified that she is not withdrawing her previous order where she refused to recuse herself from the case since she has already initiated contempt proceedings against some respondents and “other contemnors”.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma vs Arvind Kejriwal

It will be recalled that the development comes amidst the ongoing clash between AAP leaders and the Delhi High Court over the scrapped case about the excise policy. It may be mentioned that the court had earlier been hearing an appeal filed by CBI challenging discharge of Arvind Kejriwal, former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and others in the case of liquor policy scam.

What did Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma say in court? 

Justice Sharma said in court that “extremely vilifying, extremely contemptuous, and defamatory” material was being circulated online against her as well as the court. Asserting that “she cannot remain silent on this matter”, the judge said that contempt proceedings will be initiated against the respondents associated with the case.

What is the case between Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma vs Arvind Kejriwal? 

The row goes back to several weeks ago when Mr. Kejriwal himself appeared in the Delhi High Court pleading that he be exempted from proceedings before Justice Sharma since he had a “reasonable apprehension of bias” and had multiple reasons to believe that the proceedings were biased towards investigative agencies.

However, Justice Sharma had firmly dismissed this plea in April, saying that impartiality of judges must be assumed and no one can decide the competence of a judge. She said that such a move would create the “floodgates” for forum shopping.

What happened earlier? 

After the recusal motion was denied, Kejriwal, Sisodia, and a few other accused told the court that they would not come to Judge Sharma’s courtroom for the excise policy hearing. The conflict escalated when videos and articles related to the hearing were circulated on the Internet, leading to an order by another judge demanding the removal of specific video footage from the Internet.

ALSO READ: Vijay’s Big Move: Tamil Nadu Hikes DA For Government Employees | Check Details