Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma's children are Central govt. counsel: Arvind Kejriwal in fresh affidavit before Delhi HC

Former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has filed a fresh affidavit before the Delhi High Court to bolster his plea seeking recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from the excise policy case in which Kejriwal is an accused..In this new affidavit, Kejriwal has flagged that Justice Sharma's children are panel counsel for the Central government and cases are allocated to them for arguing by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta who is also the lawyer representing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the excise policy case.This gives rise to a "direct and serious appearance of conflict of interest", the affidavit states. "I state that in the present case, the Learned Solicitor General of India is appearing before this Hon'ble Court for the Central Bureau of Investigation, is opposing my recusal application, and is arguing the revision petition against the discharge order passed in my favour. I respectfully state that this gives rise to a direct and serious appearance of conflict of interest. The very law officer and legal establishment representing the prosecuting side before this Hon'ble Court is also part of the institutional mechanism by which Central Government cases and Government work are allocated to the immediate family members of the Hon'ble Judge hearing the matter," Kejriwal has said. .Kejriwal has referred to certain documents received through Right to Information (RTI) as per which a substantial amount of legal work was allocated to the judge's son during 2023-2025. He says that these facts should have been pointed out by the Solicitor General on the first date of the hearing and not left for legal journalists or social media to discover. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief has also raised objections to the judge not giving him an opportunity to make a rejoinder submissions. He says that he left the Court at around 3:45 PM after seeking permission from the Court and had no reason to expect the matter would continue substantially beyond the court hours. The proceedings continued beyond 7:00 PM and were concluded on the same day itself, with the result that he was effectively denied any fair and reasonable opportunity to prepare and advance rejoinder arguments, Kejriwal has said. "In the ordinary course, and particularly since I was appearing as party-in-person, it was reasonable for me to expect that some reasonable time [even can be the next day itself] and opportunity to address would be granted to me thereafter to prepare and address rejoinder submissions, especially in a matter of this gravity involving a recusal plea founded on several factual and legal issues," his affidavit states.