Arvind Kejriwal Defies Judge, Claims Gandhian Satyagraha Justifies Court Non-Appearance
Arvind Kejriwal refuses court appearance, citing the Satyagraha principle in the liquor policy case.
A political and legal controversy has emerged after Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal reportedly wrote a letter to a Delhi High Court judge expressing his decision to not appear before her in connection with the ongoing liquor policy case. The development comes amid proceedings linked to the case, which has been under judicial scrutiny and political debate for several months.
In his letter addressed to Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, Kejriwal claimed that his confidence in receiving justice from her had been "shattered". He further stated that his decision to avoid appearing before the judge was in line with the Gandhian principle of "Satyagraha", describing it as a form of peaceful protest rooted in moral resistance. The letter has added a new dimension to an already sensitive legal matter.
According to the details reported, the AAP leader’s stance follows the judge’s refusal to recuse herself from hearing cases related to the Delhi liquor policy matter. Kejriwal’s communication suggests that he views the continued hearing of the case by the same judge as a point of concern, raising questions about judicial impartiality from his perspective. However, there has been no official judicial response regarding the contents of the letter at this stage.
Also Read: Delhi High Court To Deliver Verdict On Kejriwal’s Recusal Plea Today
The liquor policy case itself has been a politically charged issue, involving allegations and counter-allegations between various agencies and political actors. It has led to multiple legal proceedings and arrests of several individuals connected to the policy framework and its implementation, making it one of the most closely followed cases in recent times.
The latest development is expected to intensify political debate, as it touches upon both judicial process and political messaging. Legal experts note that while parties may express disagreement with court proceedings, the matter will ultimately continue within the framework of the judiciary as per established legal procedures.
Also Read: Delhi High Court Questions SRB Over Mattoo Case Arbitrary Decision
