In an unprecedented move, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal has announced a “Satyagraha,” stating he will not appear before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in the Delhi excise policy case. The decision follows the Delhi High Court’s dismissal of his recusal plea, in which the court sternly warned that “the courtroom cannot become a theatre of perception.”
The Stand-Off: ‘Voice of Conscience’
In a letter addressed to Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, Kejriwal expressed a “complete distrust” in the proceedings, confirming he would not appear either in person or through legal counsel. Citing the principles of Mahatma Gandhi, the AAP leader stated that his “hope of receiving justice” from the judge had been “shattered.”
“Heeding the voice of my conscience, I have made a decision,” Kejriwal wrote, according to party sources. While refusing to participate in the current proceedings, he maintained his right to challenge the High Court’s eventual verdict before the Supreme Court of India.
The Recusal Dismissal
The confrontation intensified after the Delhi High Court rejected Kejriwal’s application seeking the recusal of Justice Sharma. Kejriwal had alleged a potential conflict of interest, pointing to the empanelment of the judge’s children as Central Government counsel. He argued that this development created a “reasonable apprehension of bias” in a case where the Central Government is a key stakeholder.
However, the High Court found these allegations lacking in legal merit, describing them as being based on “conjecture.”
Court’s Observations: ‘Justice Cannot Be Managed’
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while dismissing the plea, issued a sharp critique of the attempt to force a recusal based on “insinuations and aspersions” rather than concrete evidence. The court emphasized that even high-profile political figures are not exempt from the requirement to provide proof when making allegations against the judiciary.
“The courtroom cannot become a theatre of perception,” the court observed, adding that accepting such pleas without a high standard of proof would cause significant harm to institutional credibility. The bench further noted that a judge cannot be asked to step away from a case simply because a litigant fears an unfavorable outcome.
“Justice cannot be managed through perception,” the court stated firmly.
Alongside the dismissal of the recusal plea, the court issued a directive to scrub the digital footprint of the specific proceedings. It ordered the removal of all social media links related to the April 13 hearing concerning the recusal application before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.
The move marks a significant escalation in the legal battle surrounding the Delhi excise policy, as the former Chief Minister shifts his strategy from legal arguments to a self-described “path of Satyagraha” within the judicial process.
