Kejriwal Seeks Judge’s Recusal In Excise Policy Case, Says Her Children Working With Government

Kejriwal argued that a conflict of interest arises as the judge’s children are empanelled with the Centre and receive case assignments from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who is representing the CBI and opposing the recusal plea.

Arvind Kejriwal has filed an additional affidavit in the Delhi High Court seeking Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma’s recusal from hearing the CBI’s appeal in the excise policy case.

Source : PTI

Show Quick Read

Key points generated by AI, verified by newsroom

• Kejriwal requested judge's recusal in excise policy appeal.
• Affidavit cites family's work with Centre for bias concerns.
• Son, daughter represent Centre before Supreme Court.
• Concerns raised over case assignments and hearing procedures.

Former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal has moved an additional affidavit before the Delhi High Court, reiterating his demand that Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma recuse herself from hearing the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) appeal in the excise policy case.

The affidavit was filed a day after Justice Sharma reserved her verdict on the recusal applications, with Kejriwal raising concerns about a perceived conflict of interest linked to the judge’s family members and their professional engagements with the Centre.

‘Direct and Serious Apprehension of Bias’, Says Kejriwal

In his submission, Kejriwal stated that Justice Sharma’s son is empanelled as a Group A counsel representing the Centre before the Supreme Court, while her daughter serves as a Group C counsel in the apex court and is also a pleader for the Centre in the Delhi High Court.

He further claimed that both are assigned cases by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who is appearing for the CBI and opposing Kejriwal’s plea for recusal in the same matter.

The affidavit argues that this overlap creates a “direct and serious” apprehension of bias, as the same legal establishment representing the prosecuting agency is also involved in allocating government work to the judge’s immediate family members, reported Hindustan Times.

Kejriwal stated that the situation raises concerns about impartiality, particularly in a criminal case where the CBI is the prosecuting agency and senior law officers of the Centre are appearing against him.

Details of Case Assignments, Court Proceedings Cited

The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) convenor also highlighted that Justice Sharma’s son had been assigned a substantial volume of Central government cases, 2,487 in 2023, 1,784 in 2024, and 1,633 in 2025.

He further contended that his concerns were compounded by procedural issues during the hearing. According to the affidavit, he was allegedly denied an opportunity to present rejoinder submissions on the recusal plea.

Kejriwal also pointed to the court continuing and concluding hearings beyond regular hours, and recording that he had left after making submissions, aspects he suggested contributed to his apprehensions.

Additionally, the affidavit noted that during the pendency of the recusal application, the court passed substantive directions in the main petition, including setting an April 10 deadline for filing a response, with a warning that the right to reply would be closed if not met.

The matter now awaits the court’s decision on the recusal plea, which could have significant implications for the ongoing legal proceedings in the excise policy case.