The development comes after Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma rejected Kejriwal’s plea seeking her recusal from the matter. In response, Kejriwal raised objections regarding the judge’s alleged attendance at events linked to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and pointed to her children’s professional roles as lawyers representing the central government, including handling briefs from the counsel of the Central Bureau of Investigation.
Kejriwal’s decision to boycott the proceedings has triggered a sharp divide in public and political reactions. Supporters have described the move as a Gandhian act aimed at promoting judicial transparency and accountability. Critics, however, have dismissed it as political theatre, warning that non-appearance could result in ex-parte orders being passed against him in the ongoing legal proceedings.
The case pertains to the controversial 2021–22 Delhi excise policy, which has been under investigation, with the CBI challenging earlier relief granted to Kejriwal. The latest standoff adds a new dimension to the legal battle, raising questions about judicial conduct, procedural fairness, and the strategic choices of high-profile defendants in sensitive cases.
The boycott underscores escalating tensions between the political leadership and judicial processes, with potential implications for both the legal trajectory of the excise policy case and broader debates on institutional integrity and accountability.
About The Author
Comment List