Breaking: Delhi High Court Issues Notice To CBI In Application Seeking Recusal Of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma In Excise Policy Case, Kejriwal To Argue In Person

The Delhi High Court issued a notice to the CBI regarding an application filed by Arvind Kejriwal seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from the Delhi excise policy case.

Appearing in person, the Aam Aadmi Party's Leader informed the court that he would argue the recusal application himself, asserting that he has not authorized any legal counsel for this specific plea.

The High Court had issued notice to Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, K Kavitha, and 20 others on a petition filed by the CBI challenging their discharge in the Delhi excise policy case. The Court also stayed the operation of the trial court's "scathing remarks" and the direction for a departmental inquiry against the CBI’s investigating officers, terming such observations "uncalled for" at this stage.

The Bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma observed, "Respondent No. 18 is present in person who has sought this Court's permission to file an application...This court takes the application on record...Registry is directed to take the application on record...Advance notice of this application was received by the other side. Let them file a reply by tomorrow...We will hear it on Monday at 2 p.m."

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the CBI, while Arvind Kejriwal appeared in person.

The High Court was hearing a petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the discharge of Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, K Kavitha, and 20 others in the Delhi excise policy case. This was followed by a trial court order which cleared all 23 accused of corruption charges related to the alleged liquor policy scam.

Kejriwal appeared in the Court and submitted, "I have filed a recusal application...This be taken on record."

Mehta said, "Some people in the country make a career out of making allegations. It is an allegation against the institution, and we will have to support the institution...One of the person who is appearing is also represented by an Advocate. I have no difficulty if he is appearing in person but first he has to discharge his lawyers...This forum...this Court is not for theatrics."

Kejriwal said, "As per the rules of the High Court the Petitioner in person is not allowed to e-file the application...It can only be done on the orders of the court."

Justice Sharma said, "I will issue notice."

Mehta submitted, "These kinds of baseless allegations are not coming for the first time. It's coming for the first time against this institution."

The Court asked Kejriwal, "You will argue your case yourself?"

Kejriwal replied, "I will argue this case myself. I will avail my legal rights. As of now i have not issued my vakalatnama to anyone."

Mehta also submitted that they have received seven applications seeking recusal of Justice Sharma in the matter.

Accordingly, the matter will now be heard on April 13, 2026, at 2 p.m.

Background

Special Judge Jitendra Singh of the Rouse Avenue Courts discharged the accused after finding that the CBI failed to establish a prima facie case. The judge stated that the voluminous chargesheet contained numerous gaps and lacked support from witness statements or documents. Regarding Arvind Kejriwal, the court ruled he was implicated without any cogent material, while it found no evidence to charge Manish Sisodia.

The trial court’s order included a sharp critique of the CBI's investigation. The judge noted "misleading averments" in the chargesheet and observed that the evidence presented did not match the claims made by the agency. Consequently, the court ordered a departmental inquiry against the CBI’s Investigating Officer to address these lapses.

In its revision petition, the CBI argues that the trial court’s decision is legally flawed. The agency contends that the judge conducted a "mini-trial" by performing an in-depth evaluation of evidence that is typically reserved for a full trial, rather than the charge-framing stage. The CBI is seeking to overturn the discharge and stay the order for an inquiry against its officer.

On September 13, 2024, the Supreme Court had allowed Kejriwal's bail plea in the corruption case related to the excise policy scam. On September 5, the Bench had reserved order in the bail plea.

On August 14, the Court had refused to grant interim bail to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in the corruption case related to the excise policy scam. The Bench had issued notice to the CBI on the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by Kejriwal against the Delhi High Court order upholding his arrest by the agency.

Earlier, on August 5, the Delhi High Court had denied interim bail to Kejriwal in the corruption case. The Court had pronounced the order, which was reserved on July 29. Earlier, on July 17, the Court reserved order in his plea challenging arrest in the case.

It is to be noted that on July 2, the Court had issued notice to the CBI in Kejriwal's plea challenging arrest. Thereafter, Kejriwal also moved a bail plea; in the same case, a notice was issued to the CBI on July 5.

Kejriwal was arrested by the CBI on June 26 from Tihar Jail, where he was already in judicial custody till July 3 in a PMLA case related to an excise policy scam. Initially, the AAP National convenor was remanded 3-day CBI remand by a Trial Court order dated June 26. Thereafter, Kejriwal had been initially sent to 14-day judicial custody, i.e. till July 12.

On August 27, 2024, the Supreme Court had also granted bail to K. Kavitha, Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader and daughter of Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao, who was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the Delhi excise policy scam case. The Court had also granted bail to former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia in the excise policy scam case.

Cause Title: Central Bureau of Investigation v. Kuldeep Singh and Ors. [CRL.REV.P.: 134/2026]