गोवा खबर
AAP questions BJP for politicising the genuine concerns raised by Arvind Kejriwal and diverting attention from the demand for Fair Justice
Goa Khabar : Aam Aadmi Party Goa State President Valmiki Naik along with Legal Wing Member Sunil Loran and Minority leader Sarfaraz Ankalgi tore into the BJP’s rhetoric for Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma’s refusal to recuse herself from the excise case and politicing the demand for fair justice into women’s issue, arguing that the 10 reasons cited by Arvind Kejriwal were sufficient to warrant her withdrawal. They said proving actual bias in court is not necessary, as a reasonable apprehension in the mind of applicant is enough.
AAP State President Valmiki Naik said that The Rouse Avenue court judgement on 9th March showed BJP’s conspiracy of framing opposition leaders to the entire public. In the Delhi High court case, he pointed to the Hon’ble Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma’s repeated participation in RSS-affiliated Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad (ABAP) events and the empanelment of both her children with the Central government. He added that Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, who represents the Centre against Arvind Kejriwal in the same court, allocates a significant number of cases to her son, raising the possibility of a conflict of interest and casting apprehension whether justice would be delivered in her court.
Valmiki Naik further said that Arvind Kejriwal had placed before the High Court a reasonable apprehension that justice may not be delivered by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma’s court. “It is not necessary and not was intended to prove actual bias before the court. A reasonable apprehension of not receiving justice is sufficient for recusal,” he said. Arvind Kejriwal had cited 10 reasons, two of which are especially critical and easily understandable to the general public. He explained that Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma has two children, a son and a daughter, both of whom are lawyers, and added, “Both are empanelled with the Central government and appear on its behalf in the Supreme Court and High Court. While dozens of lawyers are on the panel, it is Solicitor General Tushar Mehta who decides which lawyer gets which case.”
“This is the same Tushar Mehta who represents the Centre, including the CBI and ED, against Arvind Kejriwal in the excise case. Tushar Mehta decides daily which cases to assign, and among those receiving assignments are the judge’s son and daughter,” he added.
Valmiki Naik further said that the Solicitor General stands against Arvind Kejriwal and is among the most powerful lawyers representing the government. “When the same person decides to assign numerous cases to the judge’s son, it creates a doubt in the mind of applicant that this constitutes a conflict of interest,” Arvind Kejriwal has argued, Saurabh Bharadwaj said. He noted that this concern was expressed both in open court and through an affidavit, stating that case assignments by the Solicitor General are not done for free but involve payment from the government, creating financial benefit. “Due to this benefit, a reasonable apprehension arises in my mind as to whether the court may be biased while deciding a matter involving that Solicitor General,” he said, quoting Arvind Kejriwal’s position.
He further pointed out that BJP MLA Daji Salkar’s press conference shows how BJP is spreading narrative against Arvind Kejriwal, using false narratives as facts and playing women card stating that Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma is being targeted for being a Women Judge. Delhi CM Rekha Gupta in a public function stated that Arvind Kejriwal got the judgement by a setting with the judge at Rouse Avenue court and no contempt of court filed against her. It shows how clearly bjp is trying to diver minds of the people. He urged people to look at facts and not BJP’s false narratives.
AAP Legal Wing Member Sunil Loran said, “While the BJP may believe such issues do not matter, the public understands their significance.” He added that another point raised in court by Arvind Kejriwal is a matter of fact that has been acknowledged by both the CBI and the court. “It is an undisputed and irrefutable fact that the judge’s son and daughter are on the Centre’s Supreme Court panel, and that her son, in particular, receives a disproportionately high number of cases compared to other lawyers,” he said.
He further said, “Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma herself has acknowledged attending multiple events organised by the Adhivakta Parishad, which is ideologically aligned with the RSS and functions as a lawyers’ wing of the organisation. The RSS is the parent organisation of the BJP. If the BJP says there is nothing objectionable in this, why would they?”
AAP Leaders concluded by asserting, “In the High Court, everyone knows how often someone has been seen arguing. Ordinary lawyers wear out their heels but still cannot become seniors.
