The Delhi High Court on Thursday granted a final opportunity to former chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia and AAP leader Durgesh Pathak to file their replies to the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) appeal challenging a trial court order discharging them in the excise policy case.
Event Context
A bench of Justice Manoj Jain directed the three leaders to file their responses, if any, within two weeks, even as it noted that they had been granted opportunities on earlier occasions as well but had failed to file their replies.
“The report of the registry indicates that so far, no reply has been received from respondents 8 (Manish Sisodia), 18 (Arvind Kejriwal) and 19 (Durgesh Pathak) though opportunity was granted to them earlier on several occasions. In view of interest of justice, one last opportunity is granted to them to file their replies in two weeks,” the court said in its order.
The order was passed after the court noted that none of the respondents’ counsel appeared due to the Delhi High Court Bar Association’s (DHCBA) abstention from judicial work. However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitors General SV Raju and DP Singh appeared virtually on behalf of the Centre.
The court further fixed August 17 and 18 for the CBI’s argument and said that pursuant to the completion of the agency’s argument, it would set a hearing schedule for arguments on behalf of respondents too.
On February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others, holding that prima facie the CBI’s material did not even disclose a case. The agency challenged the order in the HC.
On March 9, the HC judge stayed the trial court’s direction for departmental action against the CBI investigating officer in the case, kicking off an unprecedented face-off between Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma and Kejriwal.
Kejriwal sought the transfer of the matter to a different judge, but the plea was rejected by Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya on March 13.
On April 5, Kejriwal, Sisodia and others sought Justice Sharma’s recusal from the matter, raising concerns over a perceived conflict of interest, pointing to the empanelment of the judge’s children as Central government counsel. He argued that the situation gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. She dismissed this on April 20. On April 27, Kejriwal informed the judge in a letter that he would boycott the proceedings. Following this, Sisodia and Pathak also wrote similar letters. On May 5, the court decided to appoint senior advocates as amicus curiae to represent the three leaders, but the matter was deferred on three occasions.
However, on May 14, Justice Sharma initiated contempt proceedings against the three leaders over allegedly defamatory, contemptuous and vilifying material posted against the judge on social media and withdrew herself from hearing the CBI’s appeal and the contempt case, stating that the law did not permit a judge who has initiated contempt proceedings to continue hearing that very matter. But she clarified that her earlier April 20 order – refusing to recuse from the excise policy case – stood.
On May 25, the three leaders decided to participate in the appeal since it was listed before justice Manoj Jain. When the matter had come up, CBI’s counsel DP Singh informed the court that three vakalatnamas had been filed. The court staff also confirmed that Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak had submitted their vakalatnamas on May 25.
