Kejriwal Seeks Removal of Judge in CBI Case Appeal

Arvind Kejriwal has filed a supplementary affidavit in the Delhi High Court, requesting the removal of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma from his CBI case appeal. He argues that the judge's children are involved with the central government, creating a potential conflict of interest. This legal challenge highlights concerns over bias, as the same legal representatives for the CBI are also responsible for assigning cases to the judge's family. Kejriwal's appeal raises significant questions about judicial impartiality in high-profile cases.

By Narendra Chaudhary Apr 15, 2026, 13:06 IST

Kejriwal's Legal Challenge in Delhi High Court

Former Chief Minister of Delhi, Arvind Kejriwal, has reiterated his request for the removal of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma from the hearing of his appeal against the CBI's acquittal in the excise policy case. He argues that the judge's children are part of a central government panel and that cases are assigned to them by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who is representing the agency in the appeal.

In a supplementary affidavit filed a day after Justice Sharma reserved judgment on the applications, Kejriwal pointed out that his son is listed as a Group A lawyer representing the center before the Supreme Court, while his daughter is listed as a Group C lawyer and also represents the center in the Delhi High Court.

Kejriwal further stated that both children have been assigned cases by the Solicitor General, who is opposing the petition for the judge to recuse herself and is representing the CBI in this matter. The affidavit submitted on Tuesday emphasized that the potential for bias arising from this situation is direct, serious, and cannot be overlooked, as the same legal officials and institution representing the CBI before the judge are also responsible for assigning government work and cases to the judge's family members.

The affidavit concludes with Kejriwal requesting that the Solicitor General, who is appearing on behalf of the CBI in this honorable court, oppose his application for the judge's recusal and argue against the acquittal order passed in his favor. He humbly submits that this creates a direct and serious conflict of interest, as the legal officials representing the prosecution are part of the institutional framework that assigns government cases to the family members of the presiding judge.