Justice Sharma says she ‘cannot stay silent’ in liquor policy case

Delhi High Court Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said she would initiate contempt proceedings over allegedly defamatory and contemptuous posts targeting her during hearings in the liquor policy case. The matter involves CBI’s challenge to the discharge of Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and others

New Delhi: Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court on Thursday said she “cannot stay silent” and will initiate contempt proceedings against some of the discharged accused in the liquor policy case for posting vilifying and defamatory material against her.

Justice Sharma said she will pronounce an order on this aspect around 5 pm. “It has come to my notice that extremely vilifying, extremely contemptuous, and defamatory material is being posted by some of the respondents against me and against this court and I cannot stay silent. I have decided to draw contempt proceedings against some of the respondents and some other contemnors,” the judge said.

---

The court was hearing CBI’s petition challenging the trial court’s order discharging former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, his deputy Manish Sisodia and 21 others in the liquor policy case. The court had earlier decided to appoint senior lawyers as amici curiae to represent the unrepresented respondents, i..e AAP leaders Kejriwal, Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak.

During the hearing, Justice Sharma said some senior counsel have “graciously accepted” the court’s recommendation but in the meantime, she came across the contemptuous material. Kejriwal and MLAs have boycotted the hearing before Justice Sharma after the judge refused to recuse herself on their applications alleging conflict of interest and apprehension of bias.

On February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others in the liquor policy case, as it ruled that the case was wholly unable to survive judicial scrutiny and stood discredited in its entirety.
After Justice Sharma dismissed their applications seeking her recusal in the case on April 20, Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak wrote a letter to her, stating they would not appear before her personally or through a lawyer and would follow “Mahatma Gandhi’s path of Satyagraha”.

On April 5, the court noted that none appeared for the AAP leaders in the proceedings and closed their right to file their replies. It, however, stated that it would pass an order appointing three senior lawyers to represent them.

Kejriwal, Sisodia and other respondents claimed that the judge’s children are empanelled central government lawyers who receive work through solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who appears for the CBI in the excise case.

On April 20, Justice Sharma junked the recusal plea, saying that judges cannot recuse themselves to satisfy a litigant’s unfounded apprehension of bias. Pathak, Vijay Nair and Arun Ramchandra Pillai had also sought her recusal.