Kejriwal Refuses to Participate in Delhi HC Proceedings, Cites ‘Loss of Faith’ in Fairness

New Delhi, April 27, KNT: Aam Aadmi Party leader Arvind Kejriwal has written to Delhi High Court judge Swarna Kanta Sharma stating that he will not participate in further proceedings in a pending case, citing what he described as a loss of confidence in the fairness of the process.

In the letter addressed to the court, Kejriwal said his decision was guided by the Gandhian principle of satyagraha, adding that he had given the system an opportunity to address what he termed a “grave miscarriage of justice” but found his concerns unresolved.

He said continuing to participate in the proceedings would be inconsistent with his conscience, even as he acknowledged that such a step could prejudice his own legal interests and lead to adverse consequences.

Kejriwal raised concerns about a perceived conflict of interest, referring to the professional engagements of the judge’s family members with government legal panels. He argued that these circumstances had created what he described as a reasonable apprehension of bias in the matter.

The AAP leader cited instances of judges in the past recusing themselves in similar situations to maintain public confidence in judicial impartiality. He said the issue, in his view, extended beyond an individual case and touched upon broader public trust in the justice system.

He also referred to the principle that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done, stating that public confidence could be affected if such concerns remained unaddressed.

Kejriwal clarified that his decision was limited to the present matter and similar proceedings where such apprehensions arise, and should not be interpreted as a refusal to appear before courts in general.

He said he reserves the right to challenge the rejection of his recusal plea and may seek remedies before higher courts, including the Supreme Court, after consulting his legal team.

Reiterating his respect for the judiciary, Kejriwal said his objection was not to the institution but to the continuation of the proceedings under what he described as unresolved concerns. He requested that the letter be taken on record and that the court proceed as it deems appropriate.

The development comes after the court declined a plea seeking recusal in the matter earlier this month. [KNT]