New Delhi: Citing the roster based system for allocation of cases to judges, Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, DK Upadhyay, declined a request made by former chief minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor Arvind Kejriwal to transfer the excise policy appeal by CBI from justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who is currently hearing it, to another bench.Kejriwal has now approached the Supreme Court with a transfer petition, AAP functionaries said.In a communication issued to Kejriwal and others, who sent a representation to him on the administrative side, Chief Justice Upadhyaya pointed out that the matter has already been assigned to the judge concerned as per the existing roster, and there is no ground to order a transfer.“The petition is assigned to the Hon’ble judge as per the current roster. Any call of recusal has to be taken by the Hon’ble judge. I, however, do not find any reason to transfer the petition by passing an order on the administrative side,” the response said.The development was confirmed by sources in the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). The CBI’s appeal is listed for hearing before Justice Sharma on Monday.Former deputy CM Manish Sisodia, meanwhile, has challenged the notice issued to him by the Delhi HC in the CBI appeal.On February 27, a Delhi court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 other accused in the excise policy case, before the start of trial and at the stage of framing of charges. In a nearly 600-page order, the court questioned the evidence presented by CBI in the case and also rejected allegations of an ‘overarching conspiracy’ or ‘criminal intent’ in framing the Delhi excise policy. The court recommended departmental proceedings against the investigating officer.CBI then approached the Delhi High Court in appeal against the Rouse Avenue Court’s order, calling it “illegal on the face of it”. It also alleged that the court had conducted a “mini-trial” and had disregarded a “duly established” conspiracy.HC stayed the trial court’s observations against the investigating officer, and issued notice to Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others. No stay was granted on the discharge. The HC also said that certain observations and findings of the trial court at the stage of framing of charges, prima facie, appeared erroneous and needed consideration.On March 11, Kejriwal. Sisodia and some other accused made a representation to Chief Justice Upadhyaya to transfer CBI’s plea against their discharge by a CBI court from Justice Sharma to another “impartial” judge. The representation claimed that the undersigned had “grave, bona fide, and reasonable apprehension” that the hearing in the matter would not be impartial and neutral. It also said that Justice Sharma had not given any relief to the accused in the past and had commented on the merits of the case.
