AAP’s Kejriwal, Sisodia move Supreme Court after Delhi HC rejects plea to transfer excise policy case
NEW DELHI: Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) convener Arvind Kejriwal and senior party leader Manish Sisodia have approached the Supreme Court after the Chief Justice of the Delhi high court rejected their request to transfer the CBI’s plea against their discharge in the excise policy case from the bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma to another judge, the party said on Sunday.The development comes a day before the CBI’s petition challenging the discharge order is scheduled to come up for hearing before Justice Sharma.
Delhi HC Chief Justice declines transfer request
As per news agency PTI, Delhi high court Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya declined the request made by former chief minister Kejriwal and other accused to transfer the matter on the administrative side.According to sources cited by PTI, the Chief Justice took the view that Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma was hearing the CBI’s petition in line with the roster allocation, and that there was no reason to pass an order of transfer.Following that rejection, the AAP said Kejriwal and Sisodia have challenged the decision in the Supreme Court.
Why did Kejriwal seek transfer?
On March 11, Kejriwal, Sisodia and other accused in the excise policy case submitted a representation to the Delhi high court Chief Justice seeking transfer of the CBI’s plea from Justice Sharma to another “impartial” judge.Kejriwal said in his representation that he had a “grave, bona fide, and reasonable apprehension” that the hearing in the matter would not be impartial and neutral.The CBI has moved the Delhi high court against the order of the trial court that discharged Kejriwal and other accused in the excise policy case.
What happened in the high court?
While issuing notice to all 23 accused, including Kejriwal, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma had observed that certain findings and observations made by the trial court at the stage of framing of charges prima facie appeared erroneous and required consideration.That observation appears to have triggered the apprehension raised by the AAP leaders.Earlier, Kejriwal’s representation argued that the high court, at the very first short hearing on March 9, not only issued notice but also, ex parte and without hearing the discharged accused, recorded a prima facie view that the trial court’s detailed order was “erroneous”.Representation also objected to the high court staying the trial court’s directions and observations against the investigating officer, including proposed departmental action, without spelling out the specific perversity that justified such interim interference.According to the representation, such relief at the threshold stage and without hearing the discharged accused strengthened the apprehension that the revision plea may not be heard with the required judicial detachment.
Trial court had discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and others
Arguments on charges in the excise policy case began in December 2025, and on February 27, the special CBI court passed a detailed order discharging Kejriwal, Sisodia, AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh and all other accused in the matter.Kejriwal had been arrested in June 2024 in connection with the case and chargesheeted in July 2024.The CBI’s petition challenging the discharge is now listed for hearing before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Monday.