AAP chief questions impartiality, cites right to fair hearing in excise policy case
AAP national convener and former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal rightly believes that he was unjustly kept in jail for months on end when the investigating agencies misused the law and the judiciary looked the other way in the excise policy scam case. He has now proved his innocence in court, and wants a particular judge to recuse from hearing the appeal of the CBI against the lower court judgment. According to him, the case was part of a conspiracy hatched by the ruling dispensation which owes allegiance to the RSS, and the judge in question is also associated with the organisation.
It is normal practice for judges to recuse themselves from a case if a party wants them to do so. Even when the reasons cited are questionable, judges do not insist on hearing a particular case. Some even do this on their own volition even before a party raises the issue. Justice can be dispensed by anyone sitting on the bench. However, the judge must inspire the confidence in the petitioner or defendant that they will give them a fair hearing and their decision will not be influenced by external factors.
Unfortunately, Mr Kejriwal holds that the judge who is assigned to hear the CBI appeal is not impartial. A person hounded by the government and denied protection by the judiciary has a right to demand a fair hearing, and he is seeking just that. It is not that Mr Kejriwal has a case against every judge; he has been battling court cases for long but has not been seen to make such a demand before. As for the judge, she has recused herself just the other day from hearing another case which involves a politician, too. It is in the interest of justice and for upholding people’s trust in the system that she recuses herself from this case as well.
