Delhi HC issues fresh notices to Kejriwal, Sisodia in excise policy case
Synopsis
The Delhi High Court has issued fresh notices to Kejriwal, Sisodia, and Durgesh Pathak in the CBI's challenge to their discharge in the excise policy case — even as a separate bench simultaneously initiated criminal contempt proceedings against AAP's top leadership for allegedly attempting to scandalise the judiciary. Two benches, two fronts, one party under mounting legal siege.
Key Takeaways
The Delhi High Court issued fresh notices to Arvind Kejriwal , Manish Sisodia , and Durgesh Pathak on 19 May in the CBI's revision plea against their discharge.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued the trial court's discharge order 'cannot stand scrutiny of law.' The case was transferred to Justice Manoj Jain after Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma initiated contempt proceedings over alleged 'vilifying' material against the judiciary.
The trial court had discharged all accused in a 1,100-paragraph judgment, finding no overarching conspiracy.
A separate Division Bench issued notices to Kejriwal , Sisodia , Sanjay Singh , Saurabh Bharadwaj , and Vinay Mishra in criminal contempt proceedings; next date 4 August .
The excise policy revision plea is next listed for 25 May at 2:30 pm .
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday, 19 May issued fresh notices to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and AAP leader Durgesh Pathak in a plea filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging their discharge in the alleged Delhi excise policy corruption case. The notices were issued by a single-judge Bench of Justice Manoj Jain after several respondents failed to appear or file replies despite repeated listings.
What Happened in Court
Appearing for the CBI, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that all respondents had been duly served and granted multiple opportunities to file their replies. He urged the court to hear the matter expeditiously, contending that the trial court's discharge order 'cannot stand scrutiny of law' and that the case involves serious allegations.
Taking note of the continued absence of some respondents, Justice Jain directed the issuance of fresh notices to ensure participation of all parties. The court also directed SG Mehta to inform Kejriwal, Sisodia, and Pathak of the transfer of the CBI's revision petition to Justice Jain's Bench. The matter is now listed for further hearing on 25 May at 2:30 pm.
Why the Case Was Transferred
The case came before Justice Jain after its reassignment from Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who had earlier been hearing the CBI's revision petition. The transfer followed Justice Sharma's initiation of contempt proceedings over the alleged circulation of 'vilifying and defamatory' material against the judiciary in connection with the excise policy case.
Notably, Kejriwal, Sisodia, and Pathak had earlier abstained from participating in proceedings before Justice Sharma after their recusal plea was rejected.
Background: The Trial Court's Discharge Order
The trial court, in a judgment spanning over 1,100 paragraphs, had discharged all accused persons, holding that the now-scrapped excise policy was the result of a consultative process and that the prosecution failed to establish any overarching conspiracy. In its revision plea before the Delhi High Court, the CBI has alleged that the policy was manipulated to favour select liquor traders in exchange for kickbacks.
Contempt Proceedings Run Parallel
In a separate but related development on the same day, a Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja issued notices to Kejriwal, Sisodia, Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh, and AAP leaders Saurabh Bharadwaj and Vinay Mishra in criminal contempt proceedings. The contempt case pertains to alleged attempts to scandalise the judiciary in connection with the excise policy case.
The Justice Chawla-led Bench granted four weeks to the alleged contemnors to file their replies and listed the matter for further hearing on 4 August. No counsel appeared on behalf of the alleged contemnors, and the court indicated it may appoint an amicus curiae to assist in adjudicating the criminal contempt case.
With two separate benches now hearing interlinked proceedings, the legal pressure on AAP's top leadership is set to intensify in the weeks ahead.
Point of View
Another on criminal contempt — signals that the excise policy case is far from the legal closure AAP had hoped for after the trial court's discharge order. What is striking is the pattern of non-participation: AAP's leadership boycotted Justice Sharma's bench and now faces fresh notices before Justice Jain, a tactic that courts are visibly losing patience with. The contempt proceedings, if they proceed to findings, could carry consequences independent of the corruption case itself. Mainstream coverage has focused on the discharge as a political victory for AAP; the more consequential story may be the contempt track, which runs on its own timeline and cannot be discharged the same way.
NationPress
14 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Delhi High Court issue fresh notices to Kejriwal and Sisodia?
The Delhi High Court issued fresh notices because several respondents, including Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and Durgesh Pathak, had failed to appear or file replies despite repeated listings in the CBI's revision plea challenging their discharge in the excise policy case.
What is the CBI's argument against the discharge order?
The CBI, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, has argued that the trial court's discharge order 'cannot stand scrutiny of law' and that the excise policy was manipulated to favour select liquor traders in exchange for kickbacks. The trial court had found no overarching conspiracy and held the policy resulted from a consultative process.
Why was the excise policy case transferred from Justice Sharma to Justice Jain?
The case was reassigned from Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma to Justice Manoj Jain after Justice Sharma initiated criminal contempt proceedings over the alleged circulation of 'vilifying and defamatory' material against the judiciary. Kejriwal, Sisodia, and Pathak had also refused to participate in proceedings before Justice Sharma after their recusal plea was rejected.
What are the criminal contempt proceedings about?
A Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja has initiated criminal contempt proceedings against Kejriwal, Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Saurabh Bharadwaj, and Vinay Mishra over alleged attempts to scandalise the judiciary in connection with the excise policy case. The respondents have been given four weeks to file replies; the next hearing is on 4 August.
When is the next hearing in the Delhi excise policy case?
The CBI's revision petition challenging the discharge of AAP leaders is listed for further hearing on 25 May at 2:30 pm before Justice Manoj Jain. The parallel contempt proceedings are scheduled for 4 August.
