her recusal from hearing matters related to the excise policy case.In a detailed order delivered over an hour, Justice Sharma held that “justice is not achieved by bowing to pressure” and emphasised that a litigant cannot be permitted to question a judge’s impartiality without substantive material. She observed that allowing such pleas without basis would undermine judicial independence.The court further stated that recusal cannot be granted merely to address unfounded apprehensions of bias. “A political leader cannot be allowed to damage an institution without any basis, as a personal attack on a judge is an attack on the judiciary itself,” JustiSharma remarked during the proceedings.Kejriwal had sought the judge’s withdrawal from the case, alleging concerns over impartiality in matters connected to the Delhi government’s now-scrapped excise policy. However, the court dismissed these claims, noting that no credible evidence had beepresented to justify the request.The ruling reinforces the principle that judicial officers are bound to hear cases assigned to them unless there are valid legal grounds for recusal. The excise policy case continues to remain a significant legal and political issue in the national capital.
