Delhi High Court To Appoint Amicus For Kejriwal, Sisodia & Pathak After No Appearance In Excise Policy Case

Delhi High Court hearing in CBI plea against discharge of AAP leaders in excise policy case
X

Delhi High Court deferred hearing in the excise policy case and said amici would be appointed for Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak.

The Delhi High Court decided to appoint three senior advocates as amicus curiae after Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak did not appear in the excise policy case hearing

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday indicated that it will appoint amicus curiae to represent AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak after they chose not to appear in proceedings concerning the Delhi excise policy case.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who was hearing the Central Bureau of Investigation’s appeal challenging the discharge of the accused, noted their absence and said that three Senior Advocates would be appointed as amicus curiae to assist the Court.

“I will appoint three Senior Advocates as amicus for the respondents who are not present,” the Court observed, adding that the appointments will be made on May 8, 2026.

The matter was taken up in the post-lunch session, where the Court also considered a plea by the Enforcement Directorate seeking expunction of adverse remarks made by a special judge in the case.

Appearing for the Central Bureau of Investigation, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju joined the proceedings via video conferencing. Advocate Zoheb Hossain appeared in the connected ED matter, stating he was led by ASG Raju.

During the hearing, the Solicitor General informed the Court that certain respondents, including Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak, were neither present in person nor represented through counsel.

Taking note of the absence, the Court proceeded to ensure representation by indicating the appointment of independent senior counsel as amicus curiae, underscoring the need for effective assistance in adjudicating the matter.

The case arises out of the Delhi excise policy controversy, where both the CBI and ED have initiated proceedings. The High Court is presently examining the CBI’s challenge to a trial court order discharging the accused, alongside the ED’s plea to remove certain observations made against it.

The matter will now be taken up after the appointment of amicus curiae later this week.

On the last hearing, on April 29, the Court had deferred hearing after noting that the complete trial court record had not yet been received. It had also recorded that some respondents had already filed their replies and granted a final opportunity to the remaining parties to do so by May 2.

What has happened so far:

It is to be noted that Senior AAP leader Manish Sisodia had written to Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court, stating that he will not participate in further hearings in the matter, citing concerns over the “appearance of impartial justice” and invoking principles of conscience and Satyagraha. Sisodia’s letter follows a similar communication by Arvind Kejriwal a day earlier. Referring to it, Sisodia stated, “I have carefully considered the substance of that letter… I find myself in respectful agreement with the stand taken by him, which is based on Mahatma Gandhi's teachings on Satyagraha.”

Manish Sisodia's recusal case involves a pending criminal revision petition before the Delhi High Court, where he had sought the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma citing apprehensions of bias. In the same case, Arvind Kejriwal was permitted to argue the recusal plea in person and he had made detailed submissions before the Court.

The High Court, however, rejected the recusal plea, holding that the grounds raised did not justify withdrawal of the judge and cautioning against allegations that could undermine the institution’s integrity if not substantiated.

Following the hearing, videos of Kejriwal’s courtroom arguments surfaced and were widely circulated on social media, triggering a separate controversy over alleged unauthorised recording and dissemination of court proceedings. The same is under consideration before the High Court. It is in this backdrop that after Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak have written to the Court expressing their decision to abstain from further participation in the matter.

Case Title: CBI v. Kuldeep Singh & Ors.

Bench: Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma

Hearing Date: May 5, 2026

Tags

Next Story