Former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia have moved the Delhi High Court seeking dismissal of the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) challenge to their discharge in the Excise Policy case.
The applications have been filed in the revision petition preferred by the CBI against the trial court’s February 27, 2026 order. They raise preliminary objections to the maintainability of the CBI’s plea.
Kejriwal and Sisodia have argued that the CBI filed its revision petition within four hours of the trial court’s judgment, describing the move as having been made with “unprecedented haste” and in the “most unserious manner”. They contend that the petition fails to identify any specific illegality or discrepancy in the trial court’s order.
Sisodia, in his application, argued that the CBI had failed to explain, in respect of each accused, how the discharge order was unsupported by evidence, ignored material evidence or involved an arbitrary or perverse exercise of judicial discretion. He further submitted that the CBI had not placed any evidence, material or documents before the High Court to establish perversity in the discharge order.
The applications also contend that the CBI’s “bare-shell, omnibus and non-specific petition” has caused prejudice to the respondents, as they are unable to ascertain the precise case they are required to answer. The applications are likely to be heard by Justice Manoj Jain on August 18.
On February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal and 22 other accused in the case. The CBI challenged the order before the High Court, with the matter initially coming before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.
On March 9, Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma issued notice on the CBI’s plea and stayed the trial court’s direction concerning departmental proceedings against the CBI officer who investigated the case. She also prima facie observed that certain findings recorded by the trial court appeared erroneous and directed the trial court to defer proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), which were based on the CBI case.
Kejriwal and several other accused, including Sisodia, Pathak, Vijay Nair, Arun Pillai and Chanpreet Singh Rayat, subsequently sought Justice Sharma’s recusal. They alleged a conflict of interest, citing the fact that her children were lawyers on the panel of Central government lawyers. They also alleged ideological bias, referring to her attendance at events organised by Adhivakta Parishad, the lawyers’ wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.
Justice Sharma initially rejected the recusal plea and decided to continue hearing the matter. Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak subsequently boycotted proceedings before her.
Justice Sharma later initiated contempt proceedings against Kejriwal and others over their allegations against her. In view of the development, she decided not to hear the Excise Policy case further.
The post Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia seek rejection of CBI challenge to discharge in Excise policy case appeared first on India Legal.