Delhi High Court Judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Monday said she would pronounce her verdict at 4.30 pm on pleas by Arvind Kejriwal and others seeking her recusal in the liquor policy case, after taking on record additional pleadings filed by the AAP chief.
Justice Sharma said the pronouncement was earlier scheduled for 2.30 pm, but she was "going out of her way" in accepting Kejriwal's rejoinder as a written submission in the matter.
The former Delhi chief minister appeared virtually through video conferencing and urged the court to take on record his rejoinder to the written submissions filed by the CBI.
As Kejriwal argued that the registry's refusal to accept his rejoinder was a "miscarriage of justice", Justice Sharma said that since he was not represented by a lawyer, the court had gone "out of its way" for him earlier as well when it allowed him to file an additional affidavit last week after the recusal matter had already been reserved for orders.
The judge said that under registry rules, a party appearing in person must seek the court's permission before filing any document and since the present matter was not "extraordinary", the same procedure was being followed.
She added that in law, there is no concept of filing a "rejoinder" to the opposite party's written submissions, and she would instead allow Kejriwal to tender the document as written submissions so that he does not feel unheard.
"You say you have respect for me. I have respect for every litigant. The rule of court will not be changed for anyone so I will treat it as written submissions. I am taking it on record. I am giving the indulgence to Mr Kejriwal," the court stated.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CBI, opposed Kejriwal's request and said nowhere in the country were pleadings taken on record after orders had been reserved by a court.
He also said there is no concept of filing rejoinder to written submissions and the court should do what it would do for any ordinary litigant.
Kejriwal has raised several objections to Justice Sharma hearing the CBI's plea against his discharge in the liquor policy case. He said she had earlier denied him relief on his petition challenging arrest and had refused relief in bail pleas of other accused, including Manish Sisodia and K Kavitha.
He also claimed that Justice Sharma had made "strong and conclusive" findings.
The former chief minister further alleged a "direct conflict of interest", claiming that the judge's children are empanelled central government lawyers who receive work through the solicitor general, who is appearing for the CBI in the matter.
Apart from Kejriwal, recusal applications were also filed by AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak. Other respondents, including Vijay Nair and Arun Ramchandra Pillai, have also sought her recusal.
The solicitor general urged Justice Sharma to initiate contempt action against Kejriwal and others for seeking her recusal.
Calling the concerns raised by Kejriwal and others "apprehensions of an immature mind," Mehta told the court it was a matter of "institutional respect" and that Justice Sharma should not yield to pressure, as her recusal on "unfounded allegations" would set a bad precedent.
On February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and others in the Delhi liquor policy case, saying the CBI's case was wholly unable to survive judicial scrutiny and stood discredited in its entirety.
