The Delhi High Court on Tuesday said that it would appoint three senior lawyers as amici curiae to represent Aam Aam Party leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak in the case challenging their discharge in the liquor policy case, Live Law reported.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma passed the order after the former chief minister, Sisodia and Pathak decided last week to boycott the proceedings before her in the petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation against the trial court order discharging them and several others in the case.
The judge said that the amici curiae will be appointed on the next date of hearing on Friday. An amicus curiae is an impartial legal expert appointed by the court to assist it in complex legal matters, public interest litigations or cases where a party is unrepresented.
On April 20, Sharma rejected a petition filed by the AAP leaders demanding that she should recuse herself from hearing the case. Their petition had raised concerns about “perceived ideological proximity”, referring to Sharma attending an event of an organisation linked to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.
The RSS is the parent organisation of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.
Kejriwal also argued before Sharma that she had repeatedly passed orders in favour of the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate in the liquor policy case.
On May 27, the AAP chief said that he would not appear before Sharma. A day later, party leader Manish Sisodia also told Sharma that he would not appear before her in the liquor policy case.
In separate letters, Kejriwal and Sisodia had reiterated their concern about Sharma’s “public association” with the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, which is a lawyers’ group linked to the RSS.
The two party leaders also noted that Sharma’s son and daughter have been empanelled as counsels by the Union government. Kejriwal highlighted that they are both allocated cases by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who is appearing before the High Court representing the CBI.
An empanelled counsel is a lawyer selected by a government body, public sector undertaking or organisation to represent their legal cases for a designated period.
The liquor policy case
The CBI had alleged irregularities in the Delhi government’s liquor excise policy, which has since been scrapped. Based on the CBI case, the ED also launched an investigation into allegations of money-laundering.
The policy came into effect in November 2021. It was withdrawn in July 2022 with Vinai Kumar Saxena, the Delhi lieutenant governor at the time, recommending an investigation into the alleged irregularities of the policy.
The two central agencies alleged that the AAP government at the time modified the liquor policy by increasing the commission for wholesalers from 5% to 12%. This allegedly facilitated the receipt of bribes from wholesalers who had a substantial market share and turnover.
On February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia, Pathak and 20 others accused by the CBI in the case. There was no overarching conspiracy or criminal intent in the excise policy, the court had ruled.
The court had also criticised the central agency for implicating Kejriwal without any cogent material. It said that the chargesheet had several gaps not supported by any witnesses or statements.
However, the High Court on March 9 stayed the adverse observations made by the trial court about the CBI. The matter was heard by Sharma, who prima facie observed that the trial court’s findings were erroneous.
|
