Former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Monday urged that Delhi High Court judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma step aside from hearing a CBI plea connected to the Delhi excise policy matter, raising concerns about perceived impartiality.

Appearing personally before the court, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) convenor argued that the judge had attended multiple functions organised by Adhivakta Parishad, a lawyers’ body he described as ideologically aligned with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Kejriwal stated that since he and his party openly oppose the political philosophy of the BJP-RSS, such associations could create reasonable doubts about neutrality in a politically sensitive case.

Calling the liquor policy investigation politically motivated, he maintained that even the perception of bias can undermine faith in judicial proceedings. Referring to established legal principles, he stressed that public confidence in the judiciary depends not only on fairness but also on the appearance of fairness.

Kejriwal pointed to earlier judicial remarks about investigative agencies, invoking the Supreme Court’s description of the CBI as a “caged parrot” in past observations. He argued that investigative bodies must function independently and free from political influence, and claimed that developments in his case had raised concerns.

Questioning the pace at which certain cases involving Opposition leaders were being heard, he alleged that proceedings against political adversaries of the Centre appeared to be moving with unusual urgency.

Addressing the merits of the excise policy matter, Kejriwal noted that a trial court had previously discharged him, former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia and others, observing that the prosecution’s case did not withstand scrutiny. However, the High Court later issued notices on a CBI challenge to that discharge, stating that some findings of the lower court required examination.

Kejriwal contended that the High Court’s interim observations created apprehension in his mind regarding fairness. He said he had first written to the Chief Justice over these concerns before formally seeking recusal. According to him, even a genuine apprehension of bias is sufficient ground for a judge to withdraw from a matter.

He also questioned reliance on approver testimonies in the case and suggested that earlier comments made during related hearings appeared conclusive in nature. Referring to proceedings involving co-accused, he claimed that certain conclusions seemed premature and were later reconsidered at the Supreme Court level.

After completing his submissions, Kejriwal sought permission to leave the courtroom. The judge acknowledged his arguments and remarked appreciatively on his presentation, to which he responded light-heartedly.

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the CBI, opposed the plea for withdrawal, terming it unfounded. The central agency has also submitted a written reply contesting the request.

The matter remains under consideration.