Kejriwal boycotts court hearing, cites loss of faith in judge

Former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal sharpens his confrontation with the judiciary. Then, he refuses to appear before the Delhi High Court bench led by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in the excise policy case. As a result, the standoff enters a new and more direct phase.

Kejriwal writes to the judge and states his position without ambiguity. He says he no longer trusts the judge to deliver justice. He also confirms that neither he nor his lawyers will attend the proceedings. Through this move, he shifts the battle from the courtroom to a public and symbolic space.

He invokes Mahatma Gandhi’s idea of Satyagraha. He frames his decision as a moral stand rather than a legal retreat. He says his conscience guides him. At the same time, he keeps his legal options open. He signals that he may approach the Supreme Court against the judge’s refusal to step aside.

The court earlier rejects his request for recusal. Justice Sharma dismisses allegations of bias and conflict of interest. She stresses judicial independence and asserts that the court will act impartially. This firm response sets the backdrop for Kejriwal’s escalation.

Reactions remain mixed. Supporters of the Aam Aadmi Party gather outside court premises and echo his claims of unfair treatment. Some legal experts, however, question the strategy. They argue that absence from court may weaken his legal position. Others see the move as a calculated political message ahead of future electoral battles.

The excise policy case already carries high political stakes. Investigative agencies continue to probe alleged irregularities in Delhi’s liquor policy. The case has drawn national attention and triggered intense political exchanges between the AAP and opposition parties.

At the same time, Kejriwal’s move raises broader questions. Observers now debate the limits of protest within judicial processes. They also discuss how public leaders should respond when courts reject their claims.

Tensions between political authority and judicial institutions have surfaced in several recent cases. This episode adds another layer to that ongoing debate.

The next steps remain crucial. If Kejriwal approaches the Supreme Court, the legal battle may shift again. Until then, his decision to stay away from court signals both defiance and risk, as the case continues to unfold.