|
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Thursday opposed AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal's affidavit raising concerns over Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma's children being empanelled as Central Government counsel, telling the Delhi High Court that accepting such allegations would lead to a situation where "all judges would be disqualified" from hearing matters involving governments or public sector undertakings.
In its written submissions, the CBI argued that the apprehension of bias based on professional engagements of a judge's family members is legally untenable and would have far-reaching consequences for the judicial system. It is submitted that if such a standard is accepted, any judge whose relatives are associated with government panels or public bodies would be barred from hearing a wide range of cases, effectively paralysing court functioning. The agency further alleged that an "orchestrated social media campaign" is being run against Justice Sharma to create pressure on the Bench. It claimed that selective and misleading information, including RTI data, was being circulated and amplified to question the impartiality of the court and influence the proceedings. CBI also reiterated that Kejriwal's affidavit dated April 14 was filed after the conclusion of arguments and reservation of judgment, terming it a "belated afterthought" intended to introduce new allegations at a stage when the matter had already been heard in full. It urged the court not to take the affidavit on record and to strongly discourage such practices. Placing a detailed sequence of events on record, the agency pointed out that similar recusal attempts had earlier been made before the Chief Justice of the High Court and the Supreme Court, but were either dismissed or not pursued. According to the CBI, this reflects a pattern aimed at delaying proceedings and avoiding adjudication on merits. The Delhi High Court took on record a fresh affidavit filed by Arvind Kejriwal, who appeared in person before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in connection with his recusal plea in the excise policy case. Kejriwal has alleged a perceived conflict of interest arising from the empanelment of the judge's children as Central Government counsel and argued that this creates a reasonable apprehension of bias. He also stated that he was unable to file a rejoinder after leaving the courtroom with permission while proceedings continued. Opposing the plea, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta termed it frivolous, while defence counsel argued that the issue must be assessed from the perspective of a reasonable litigant. The High Court has reserved its order on the recusal plea in the Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22 case. (ANI)
|
