New Delhi, April 27: A political and legal debate has erupted following a letter from former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal to Justice Swarnakanta Sharma. In the letter, Kejriwal expressed his loss of faith in receiving justice from Justice Sharma’s court. Consequently, he has decided not to appear in court himself and has instructed his lawyer to do the same. He cited inspiration from Mahatma Gandhi’s principles of Satyagraha, stating that he will now pursue a path of moral and ideological opposition instead of a legal battle.
Many AAP leaders have reacted to this decision on the social media platform X. AAP leader Aman Arora posted, “When politics overshadows the judicial process, both truth and justice suffer. In the case of the BJP government, which is linked to the RSS ideology, the possibility of impartiality diminishes significantly when questions arise about the judge’s connections to the RSS.”
Similarly, Punjab’s PWD Minister Harbhajan Singh remarked that hope for justice exists only when the judiciary is entirely impartial. He pointed out that when the case is registered by the BJP government, which is ideologically connected to the RSS, and the hearing is before Justice Swarnakanta Sharma—who has acknowledged her participation in RSS events—concerns about fairness and justice are inevitable.
He emphasized that this is why Arvind Kejriwal has chosen the path of Satyagraha, as shown by Mahatma Gandhi, deciding not to appear in court or send a lawyer on his behalf.
Punjab Minister Lal Chand Kataruchak stated that justice must not only occur but must also be perceived as such. When the case is associated with the BJP government, and the lawyer Tushar Mehta is linked to the same panel, while the judge has admitted to ties with the RSS, the entire judicial process comes under scrutiny. In such circumstances, Kejriwal remains steadfast in his decision to boycott the court.
Punjab’s Home Minister Advocate Harpal Singh Cheema noted that Kejriwal’s choice to follow the path of Satyagraha, inspired by Mahatma Gandhi, is a strong stance for truth and justice. He remarked that it might be the first time since independence that a leader has adopted such an approach to highlight systemic issues.
He added that when Justice Swarnakanta Sharma, who has open ties to the RSS, presides over a case where the CBI lawyer Tushar Mehta is also involved, concerns about impartiality cannot be overlooked. Kejriwal’s refusal to appear in her court is a principled step to maintain public trust in the justice system.
In this context, Sanjeev Arora stated that Kejriwal believes it is crucial for the credibility of the legal justice process that impartiality is not only present but also visible. When questions arise publicly about the impartiality of the court hearing a case filed by the BJP government, it creates a contentious situation. Thus, Kejriwal has opted to distance himself from the judicial process, following Mahatma Gandhi’s principles of Satyagraha.
Legislator Hardeep Singh Mundian remarked that the injustice faced by Kejriwal is evident. When Justice Swarnakanta Sharma presides over the case involving Tushar Mehta, and familial ties raise concerns, worries about ‘conflict of interest’ are entirely justified. In such circumstances, Kejriwal’s stance is in favor of transparency in justice.
It is noteworthy that on April 20, Justice Swarnakanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court dismissed Kejriwal’s petition requesting her recusal from the Delhi excise policy case.
–
My name is Bhupendra Singh Chundawat. I am an experienced content writer with several years of expertise in the field. Currently, I contribute to Daily Kiran, creating engaging and informative content across a variety of categories including technology, health, travel, education, and automobiles. My goal is to deliver accurate, insightful, and captivating information through my words to help readers stay informed and empowered.
Leave a Comment