Following Mahatma Gandhi’s principles & in spirit of satyagraha, I’ve informed Judge Swarana Kanta Sharma of my decision through letter: Arvind Kejriwal
New Delhi: Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) National Convenor Arvind Kejriwal has taken a bold stand in the case being heard by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, announcing that he will neither appear in court nor present any arguments. Revealing that his hope of getting justice from the judge has collapsed, the AAP Chief said he has chosen the path of conscience, Gandhian principles and satyagraha, and has formally informed the court of his decision through a letter.
AAP National Convenor Arvind Kejriwal stated, “I had requested Judge Swarana Kanta Sharma to recuse herself from my case because of a conflict of interest, but she decided on her own to hear the matter herself. Whatever judgment Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma delivers in this case, I remain free to exercise my legal rights regarding it.”
He also clarified, “I have complete faith in the judiciary and the highest respect for it, because when conspiracies were hatched against me, it was the judiciary that cleared me of all charges and delivered justice.”
The AAP Chief said, “Many times in life, moments arise when victory or defeat do not matter. What becomes even bigger is the question of right and wrong, of what is correct and what is incorrect. At such times, we must decide whether we will choose the difficult path or the easy one. Today, I too stand at such a turning point. Everyone knows that I was trapped in a false case. I was sent to jail. An elected government was wrongfully brought down. We were kept in prison for many months, but in the end truth prevailed. On 27 February, the court declared me completely innocent. The court said that Kejriwal is innocent. Kejriwal has committed no corruption.”
He continued, “The court even raised questions over the CBI investigation itself and ordered action against the investigating officer. But the path of truth is never easy. The CBI immediately challenged this decision in the High Court, and the case came before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. At that point, a serious question arose in my mind, whether I would receive justice before her. There are several reasons why this question arose, but two are the main ones.”
Explaining the first reason, Arvind Kejriwal stated, “The government of the RSS ideology that imprisoned me through false allegations, the judge herself has acknowledged that she has repeatedly attended platforms of Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, an organisation linked to that ideology. I and the Aam Aadmi Party are staunch opponents of that ideology. In such a situation, can I receive justice before her?”
Giving the second reason, he added, “The second issue is conflict of interest. In court, the CBI of the central government stands against me, and both children of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma work for the central government. Both her children are on the panel of lawyers for the central government. On the other side in court stands Solicitor General Tushar Mehta. Tushar Mehta assigns cases to both her children. He decides how many cases they will get and which cases they will receive.”
Further, the AAP Supremo stated, “There are around 700 lawyers on the Government of India panel, but the son of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma is among those who received the highest number of cases. Between 2023 and 2025, her son received around 5,904 cases. From this, her son received crores of rupees in fees. As of today, both the future and earnings of those children depend to a considerable extent on Tushar Mehta. Therefore, it is natural for anyone to worry that if the earnings and future of the judge’s children are being decided by the lawyer standing before her, can the judge deliver a ruling against that lawyer?”
Clarifying his position, he emphasised, “I want to make it clear that I have complete faith in the judiciary. I hold the judiciary in great respect. When a wrongful conspiracy was hatched against me, it was the judiciary of our country that gave me justice. When I was arrested in a false case, it was this judiciary that granted me bail. It is this same judiciary that has declared me innocent in that false case.”
He added, “Whenever the country faced danger over the past 75 years, our judiciary protected the nation and safeguarded the interests of citizens. I also hold Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in high regard. I have no personal objection of any kind against her or her family. But there is a great principle of justice that justice must not only be done, it must also be seen to be done.”
Referring to his request, Arvind Kejriwal stated, “Therefore, with full respect, I requested Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma to recuse herself from this case because of reasons such as conflict of interest. But she rejected my arguments and ruled that she herself would hear the case. The easiest path before me today is to accept her order and engage a senior lawyer to argue my case before her. But this issue is no longer only about my case. It concerns the trust of ordinary people in the justice system. At such moments of moral dilemma, Bapu (Mahatma Gandhi) showed us the path of satyagraha.”
Quoting Mahatma Gandhi’s principle, the AAP Chief asserted, “Bapu said that whenever one faces injustice, the first step should not be protest but dialogue. One should place one’s case before the person committing injustice with complete humility and give them every opportunity to correct themselves. If, even after all efforts, justice is not received, then one must listen to the voice of conscience. If conscience says justice has not been done, then satyagraha should be undertaken peacefully and humbly. Whatever consequences follow should be gladly accepted. But throughout the process, there should be no hatred or anger towards the person committing injustice.”
He said, “I too began with dialogue. With complete sincerity and humility, I placed my case before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. I appealed to her to step aside from this matter. I requested that my case be heard by any other judge of the High Court. But she rejected my plea. She ruled that she would not recuse herself and would hear the case herself.”
Expressing disagreement, Arvind Kejriwal further said, “I respectfully disagree with the decision she has given. After this entire sequence of events, my apprehension has deepened further about whether I will receive justice before her. Following the path shown by Bapu, and in the spirit of satyagraha, I have now decided that in this case I will neither appear personally in the court of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, nor will any lawyer appear on my behalf.”
He stated, “Whatever judgment Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma delivers, I remain free, at the appropriate time, to exercise all my legal rights, including challenging it in the Supreme Court and taking any other legal steps available to me. Today I have also informed Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of this through a letter. I have no personal opposition of any kind towards her. Even in the future, if any other case of mine comes before her in which BJP, the central government, or Tushar Mehta are not opposing me, I will certainly appear before her.”
“You may ask that if I disagree with Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma’s refusal to recuse herself, then why am I not going to the Supreme Court against it? I am preparing for that. This entire matter is extremely delicate and sensitive. Keeping the law in mind, keeping respect for the judiciary in mind, and keeping people’s faith in the justice system in mind, every step must be taken carefully. I am not taking this step out of arrogance or any spirit of rebellion or protest. My purpose through this step is neither to challenge the legal system of the country nor to insult the justice system,” added the AAP Supremo.
He concluded by stating, “In this very case, at every stage and in every court, I have fully cooperated. I have great respect for the judiciary. It is because of this judiciary that I am free today. My one and only purpose is to strengthen people’s trust in the country’s justice system and to fill people with unshakeable faith that whenever needed, they will certainly receive justice from our judicial system.”
