New Delhi, April 8 (NationPress) The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has voiced strong opposition against the recusal requests made by multiple accused, including AAP Convenor Arvind Kejriwal, who are seeking the withdrawal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from the Delhi excise policy case. The CBI characterized these applications as "frivolous, baseless, and contemptuous".

In a comprehensive response submitted to the Delhi High Court on Wednesday, the investigative agency argued that the claims made are "entirely vexatious" and represent an attempt to "undermine the dignity of the court".

According to the CBI’s affidavit, the request for the recusal of an esteemed judge based on such frivolous and unfounded claims is tantamount to being contemptuous. They further emphasized that the allegations do not present any legally sustainable grounds for recusal and warned that accepting such requests could lead to a troubling precedent that encourages "forum shopping".

The agency also dismissed claims suggesting that certain interim observations indicated a "pre-determined bias". The CBI clarified that judicial comments made during interim proceedings cannot be interpreted as indicative of bias.

"It is well established that remarks made while issuing interim orders do not bind the court at the final hearing stage and cannot constitute a source of bias," the affidavit reiterated.

The CBI also stated that the recusal requests effectively aim to establish an unreasonable rule that any court granting interim relief must recuse itself from further proceedings.

In addressing the allegations concerning the judge’s supposed ties to the Akhil Bhartiya Adhivakta Parishad, the CBI labeled these claims as "unscrupulous and sweeping". They argued that participation in a legal seminar cannot be grounds for recusal, especially when the seminar’s topic was not politically charged, thus failing to demonstrate any ideological bias.

The CBI warned that granting recusal requests based on prior judicial remarks would jeopardize the rule of law and lead to "bench hunting".

It further pointed out that the recusal applications obscure critical facts, including instances where the same bench had granted reliefs to certain accused individuals.

"The issuance of both favorable and unfavorable orders demonstrates that there can be no reasonable apprehension of bias," the agency asserted.

They emphasized that concerns regarding bias must be "reasonable and not mere fabrications", and that recusal cannot be pursued "lightly".

The CBI firmly stated that no litigant possesses the right to demand a bench of their choosing, reiterating that the authority to allocate benches rests solely with the Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant, who acts as the "master of the roster".

"No party has the entitlement to be heard by a bench of its own preference," the agency concluded.

This development follows the Delhi High Court issuing a notice on April 6 regarding Kejriwal's recusal application, wherein he appeared in person to request the transfer of the case from Justice Sharma's bench.

The Delhi High Court is currently reviewing the CBI's appeal against a trial court ruling that discharged Kejriwal, former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and others from the alleged corruption case tied to the now-repealed Delhi Excise Policy 2021–22.