'Won't appear in excise case personally or through lawyer': A defiant Kejriwal writes to Delhi HC judge

New Delhi: AAP supremo Arvind Kejriwal has written to Delhi High Court Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, saying he will not appear in the excise case personally or through a lawyer before her after she refused to recuse from hearing it.

In his letter to Justice Sharma, he said he has not written in anger nor in disrespect nor in any spirit of personal confrontation with her but on the contrary, written in pain, with humility and with an unabiding faith in the role of judiciary.

Kejriwal has sought her recusal from hearing an appeal filed by the CBI against his discharge in the excise policy case by a special court in February.

"Taking inspiration from the Gandhian principle of Satyagraha and after giving the authority an opportunity to consider and correct what I perceived to be a grave miscarriage of justice, I have decided that I shall not participate in the further proceedings in this matter, either in person or through counsel," he said in the four-page letter.

"I do not take this step lightly. I am fully conscious that by doing so, I may prejudice my own legal interests. I understand I may lose the opportunity to advance submissions before this court and that adverse consequences leave me no other dignified course."

"I am prepared to bear those consequences...I cannot make peace with my soul by participating in proceedings marked, in my respectful view, by such grave an appearance of conflict as all were well," he said.

Kejriwal said people can ask him that if he is unsatisfied with her order, then why does not he approach the Supreme Court and added, "I am preparing for that, this is a very sensitive case."

He had found fault with her close association with RSS' legal front Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad (ABAP) and that her children "are professionally engaged on multiple advocates' panels" of the union government, which is the opposite party in his case.

He said, "Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done", which is among the 'most sacred assurances' that a court gives to a citizen in a democracy, and that it cannot be dishonoured by asking the citizen to ignore what 'anyone can plainly see' in a case like this.

Invoking the principles of Satyagraha and the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi, he claimed that his intent is "strengthening the judiciary and preventing its weakening".

He said his plea seeking her recusal was interpreted as a personal attack and as an assault on the institution itself though it is his belief that it was now "impossible to receive an impartial hearing" in her court in the excise case.

“When I appeared before Your Ladyship to argue my case, the question in my heart was simple: Will I get justice? Today, with the deepest respect, I must say that the same question has become graver and deeper in my conscience,” he said.

"As I write this, I am also cognisant of the fact that some might portray me as someone 'against' the judiciary. But how can that ever be the case when I have personally received relief from the judiciary, including orders of bail and the present discharge? Today, I walk free because of the judiciary. Let there exist no figment of imagination that my present stand is against the institution," he added.