Delhi HC assigns excise policy case to Justice Manoj Jain after row

The Delhi High Court reassigned the excise policy case involving AAP leaders after Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma initiated contempt proceedings over social media posts

The Delhi High Court’s excise policy matter involving Arvind Kejriwal and several other Aam Aadmi Party leaders has now been assigned to Justice Manoj Jain after Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma ordered that the case be placed before another Bench.

 

Justice Sharma had been hearing the proceedings arising out of the Delhi excise policy investigation, which began in 2022 after the Central Bureau of Investigation registered an FIR alleging irregularities in the formulation and implementation of the 2021-22 liquor policy.

 

According to the agency, provisions in the policy were allegedly designed to enable cartelisation and monopolisation in Delhi’s liquor trade, while certain liquor businesses purportedly paid kickbacks to leaders of the Arvind Kejriwal-led Aam Aadmi Party.

 

The Enforcement Directorate subsequently initiated a parallel money-laundering investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The probes led to multiple arrests of opposition politicians, with some critics alleging political targeting by central agencies.

 

Investigators alleged that a criminal conspiracy was hatched during the drafting stage of the policy by senior AAP functionaries, including Manish Sisodia and Kejriwal, along with private entities and individuals. It was claimed that loopholes were deliberately inserted into the policy framework to extend post-tender advantages to select liquor licensees.

 

On February 27 this year, a trial court discharged Kejriwal and 22 others in the case. The CBI challenged that ruling before the Delhi High Court, where the matter first came up before Justice Sharma.

 

On March 9, Justice Sharma issued notice on the CBI’s plea and stayed directions passed by the trial court seeking departmental action against the investigating officer. She also observed prima facie that portions of the trial court’s reasoning appeared erroneous and directed that related PMLA proceedings based on the CBI case remain deferred.

 

Following these developments, Kejriwal and co-accused, including Sisodia, Durgesh Pathak, Vijay Nair, Arun Pillai, and Chanpreet Singh Rayat, sought Justice Sharma’s recusal. They alleged a conflict of interest and apprehension of bias.

 

Kejriwal argued that the judge should step aside because her son and daughter were empanelled counsel for the Union government. He further referred to her participation in conferences organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, which he described as ideologically opposed to AAP. He also cited previous instances where her orders had been overturned by the Supreme Court and contended that the perception of bias held by litigants was sufficient to justify recusal.

 

In support of his submissions, Kejriwal pointed to an earlier money-laundering case involving AAP leader Satyendar Jain, where a recusal request made by the ED had been accepted on the basis of the agency’s apprehension of bias rather than any finding against the judge concerned.

 

Justice Sharma rejected the recusal applications on April 20 and said she would continue hearing the case. Thereafter, Kejriwal, Sisodia, and Pathak stopped appearing before her Bench.

 

On May 14, however, Justice Sharma initiated contempt proceedings against Kejriwal, Sisodia, Pathak, Sanjay Singh, Vinay Mishra, and Saurabh Bharadwaj over alleged defamatory and vilifying social media posts targeting her in connection with the excise policy matter. In view of the contempt proceedings, she directed that the excise policy case be reassigned to another judge of the High Court.

 

The contempt proceedings are now likely to be heard on Tuesday by a Division Bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja, which presently handles the criminal contempt roster of the Delhi High Court.

 

The suo motu criminal contempt case concerns allegations that Kejriwal, Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, and other AAP leaders made “defamatory and vilifying allegations” against Justice Sharma while she was hearing the CBI’s challenge to the discharge of the accused in the excise policy matter. Justice Sharma took note of the statements and initiated contempt action against the leaders.