Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia Request New Bench In Liquor Policy Case

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and several other accused in the Delhi excise policy case have written to the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, seeking the transfer of the case from the bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma to another "impartial" bench.

In their letter, the accused have alleged bias against Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma during the course of hearings in the excise case. They have claimed to have presented certain instances and material before the Chief Justice to support their concerns.

The letter also says that all the orders passed by Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma in the excise case were later overturned by the Supreme Court of India. They argued that, in light of these developments, transferring the case to another bench is necessary to ensure fairness in the proceedings.

They further said that such a move would help maintain public confidence in the justice system and ensure that the matter is heard without any apprehension of bias.

Last week, a special Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi discharged former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and 21 other accused in the alleged Delhi liquor policy corruption case.

The court held that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused and said the material presented by the Central Bureau of Investigation did not justify the framing of charges. The court also made strong observations on the investigation, stating that the agency appeared to rely heavily on statements of approvers and was expecting the court to "join the dots" without sufficient evidence.

Following the order, the Central Bureau of Investigation approached the Delhi High Court, challenging the discharge of all 23 accused. The High Court admitted the agency's plea and issued notices to Kejriwal, Sisodia and the other accused seeking their responses. During the hearing, the court also stayed the adverse remarks made by the trial court against the CBI and its investigating officers, saying such observations at this stage appeared unnecessary.