The Central Bureau of Investigation told the Delhi High Court on Monday that accepting applications filed by AAP Supremo Arvind Kejriwal and others seeking recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from hearing the liquor policy case, will set a bad precedent.
Earlier in the day, Kejriwal while arguing in person, claimed that he had a reasonable apprehension in his mind that he will not get a fair hearing. He is seeking the recusal of Justice Sharma from hearing the CBI's revision petition challenging the trial court's order discharging Kejriwal and all other accused in the controversial liquor policy case.
Appearing for the CBI, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma that the matter assumes importance "because of the precedent it may set", that based on "surmises, conjectures and unreasonable apprehension and virtually maligning the bench, a litigant can choose the bench"."If judges start recusing, will any judge in this country be able to decide impartially?" Mehta asked.
Mehta submitted that the applicants seeking recusal were erroneous, and while the CBI has a right to oppose such applications, the bench also a duty to thwart any action which results into casting aspersions without reasons and create an atmosphere that court may have given into some form of pressure.
"Your ladyships are taking two roster, MP/MLA cases and other cases also. I will assist the court how this is erroneous. There is a pattern. It is not only the right of CBI to oppose but also the duty of bench to thwart any action which results into casting aspersions without reasons and creating an atmosphere that ultimately court may have to succumb to some kind of pressure. It is very relevant that the threshold of deciding a recusal application is always at the highest level".
Regarding Kejriwal's argument that Justice Sharma's previous observations while rejecting his plea challenging the ED arrest, Mehta submitted that as per Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the Court was mandated to make such preliminary observations regarding the need for arrest.
The SG also pointed out that the Supreme Court has not overruled the High Court's judgment approving his arrest (the matter is only referred to a larger bench while granting interim bail to Kejriwal). He argued that the Kejriwal suppressed this aspect and misled the Court.On the Supreme Court granting bail to another applicant Manish Sisodia, Mehta said that Apex Court granted bail because of long incarceration.
Mehta while concluding, sought that the applications be dismissed with costs and also sought that "contempt action be initiated". The Court reserved the order today on the recusal application after hearing the arguments.
Follow us
