April 28, 2026

MUMBAI: SC Monday rejected a petition challenging the validity of the delimitation exercise for zilla parishads, panchayat samitis and other local bodies in Maharashtra and orally observed it would not allow litigation aimed at stalling the electoral process.“We’re not going to entertain any plea that could delay polls,” said a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi Monday. The bench orally remarked the pleas seemed to be a ploy to delay local body polls. SC had earlier set a deadline of Jan 31 for such polls to conclude and said there could be no further impediment in the conduct of elections.The challenge was following a Bombay HC order which had found no illegality in the decisions taken by divisional commissioners over delimitation for Kolhapur, Satara and Sangli, the core dispute in the plea. While dismissing the plea, SC kept the question of law regarding delegation of powers open to be examined in an appropriate case.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosNavy Chief Confirms India’S Third Nuclear-Powered Ballistic Missile Submarine Soon“Both ‘Rs Must Remember Responsibility”: Bjp Slams Rahul, Renuka Over ‘Dog’ RemarksNo More Disruptions: Lok Sabha to Debate Electoral Reforms Next Week’Imran Khan’s Health Stable, But Facing Mental Torture’, Claims Sister After Jail VisitChina’s Condom Tax Shocks the World Amid Birthrate Drop as India Surges Ahead in Population RankingsPakistan Sparks Controversy With Expired Relief Claims As India Rejects Airspace Allegation StronglyCentre Signals Willingness to Discuss SIR, Asks Opposition Not to Set TimelinePakistan’s Adiala Jail To Open Gate To Imran Khan’s Sister After PTI Fury Forces Sharif, MunirRussia Confirms Su-57 Fighter Jets, S-400 Deal On Agenda Ahead of Vladimir Putin’s India VisitCapt Shubhanshu Shares What India Can Learn from ISS Successes123PhotostoriesJennifer Lawrence’s fitness philosophy: 4 lessons to take from her realistic routine8 animals whose names start with the letter “S”Guava health benefits: 7 reasons why your daily plate needs this humble fruitExclusive – Bigg Boss 19’s Ashnoor Kaur addresses allegations of hitting Tanya Mittal during the task; bond with Abhishek Bajaj; says ‘There’s a platonic love between us’5 timeless quotes by Rumi that echo the true essenceof loveNature’s smartest travellers: 5 animals with homes on their backsFrom Cinnamon Tea to Methi Shots: 8 foods and drinks with proven heart benefitsShah Rukh Khan, Amitabh Bachchan, Rajinikanth: Actors who played both hero and villain in the same film9 lesser-known Biryanis from different parts of IndiaVictoria and David Beckham: Parenting secrets from one of the strongest celebrity couples123Hot PicksParliament Winter SessionCyclone DitwahWorld NewsGold rate todaySilver rate todayPublic Holidays NovemberBank Holidays NovemberTop TrendingNina Lin ControversyPaige BueckersShedeur SandersDrake MayeOdell Beckham JrStephen CurryJaxson DartGiannis AntetokounmpoCharlie Kirk ControversyYordan Alvarez Wife

Vamsikrishna01 mins mins
MUMBAI: SC Monday rejected a petition challenging the validity of the delimitation exercise for zilla parishads, panchayat samitis and other local bodies in Maharashtra and orally observed it would not allow litigation aimed at stalling the electoral process.“We’re not going to entertain any plea that could delay polls,” said a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi Monday. The bench orally remarked the pleas seemed to be a ploy to delay local body polls. SC had earlier set a deadline of Jan 31 for such polls to conclude and said there could be no further impediment in the conduct of elections.The challenge was following a Bombay HC order which had found no illegality in the decisions taken by divisional commissioners over delimitation for Kolhapur, Satara and Sangli, the core dispute in the plea. While dismissing the plea, SC kept the question of law regarding delegation of powers open to be examined in an appropriate case.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosNavy Chief Confirms India’S Third Nuclear-Powered Ballistic Missile Submarine Soon“Both ‘Rs Must Remember Responsibility”: Bjp Slams Rahul, Renuka Over ‘Dog’ RemarksNo More Disruptions: Lok Sabha to Debate Electoral Reforms Next Week’Imran Khan’s Health Stable, But Facing Mental Torture’, Claims Sister After Jail VisitChina’s Condom Tax Shocks the World Amid Birthrate Drop as India Surges Ahead in Population RankingsPakistan Sparks Controversy With Expired Relief Claims As India Rejects Airspace Allegation StronglyCentre Signals Willingness to Discuss SIR, Asks Opposition Not to Set TimelinePakistan’s Adiala Jail To Open Gate To Imran Khan’s Sister After PTI Fury Forces Sharif, MunirRussia Confirms Su-57 Fighter Jets, S-400 Deal On Agenda Ahead of Vladimir Putin’s India VisitCapt Shubhanshu Shares What India Can Learn from ISS Successes123PhotostoriesJennifer Lawrence’s fitness philosophy: 4 lessons to take from her realistic routine8 animals whose names start with the letter “S”Guava health benefits: 7 reasons why your daily plate needs this humble fruitExclusive – Bigg Boss 19’s Ashnoor Kaur addresses allegations of hitting Tanya Mittal during the task; bond with Abhishek Bajaj; says ‘There’s a platonic love between us’5 timeless quotes by Rumi that echo the true essenceof loveNature’s smartest travellers: 5 animals with homes on their backsFrom Cinnamon Tea to Methi Shots: 8 foods and drinks with proven heart benefitsShah Rukh Khan, Amitabh Bachchan, Rajinikanth: Actors who played both hero and villain in the same film9 lesser-known Biryanis from different parts of IndiaVictoria and David Beckham: Parenting secrets from one of the strongest celebrity couples123Hot PicksParliament Winter SessionCyclone DitwahWorld NewsGold rate todaySilver rate todayPublic Holidays NovemberBank Holidays NovemberTop TrendingNina Lin ControversyPaige BueckersShedeur SandersDrake MayeOdell Beckham JrStephen CurryJaxson DartGiannis AntetokounmpoCharlie Kirk ControversyYordan Alvarez Wife


SC junks plea on local body delimitation

MUMBAI: SC Monday rejected a petition challenging the validity of the delimitation exercise for zilla parishads, panchayat samitis and other local bodies in Maharashtra and orally observed it would not allow litigation aimed at stalling the electoral process.“We’re not going to entertain any plea that could delay polls,” said a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi Monday. The bench orally remarked the pleas seemed to be a ploy to delay local body polls. SC had earlier set a deadline of Jan 31 for such polls to conclude and said there could be no further impediment in the conduct of elections.The challenge was following a Bombay HC order which had found no illegality in the decisions taken by divisional commissioners over delimitation for Kolhapur, Satara and Sangli, the core dispute in the plea. While dismissing the plea, SC kept the question of law regarding delegation of powers open to be examined in an appropriate case.





Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related News

. NEW DELHI: Vedanta Power on Monday said it has completed disbursement of compensation to the families of those killed and injured in a boiler-related incident at its power plant in Chhattisgarh’s Sakti district earlier this month.In a statement, company said it has provided financial assistance of Rs 35 lakh each to families of the deceased, while Rs 15 lakh has been disbursed to those injured in the accident. “The compensation has already been released to all 35 affected individuals and families,” it said.Vedanta Power said it is also exploring employment opportunities for family members of the deceased and will support the education of their children up to Class 12. Skill development opportunities will be extended through its training centres to enhance employability of dependents.“We are deeply saddened by the loss of lives in this tragic incident. Our thoughts remain with the bereaved families, and we are committed to supporting them in every possible way,” Vedanta Power CEO Rajinder Singh Ahuja said.An explosion occurred in a steel tube carrying high-pressure steam at Unit-1 of company’s plant in Singhitarai on April 14, killing 25 and leaving several others severely injured. The unit was being operated and maintained by NTPC GE Power Services Ltd (NGSL), a joint venture of NTPC and GE, the company said. Chhattisgarh police have registered an FIR against Vedanta group chairman Anil Agarwal and others in this connection.About the AuthorAtul MathurAtul Mathur is a Senior Assistant Editor at The Times of India with over 27 years of experience in journalism. Based in Delhi, he has spent much of his career reporting on governance, public policy and politics, churning out researched, data-driven stories that impact daily lives. Atul is known for investigative depth and strong human-interest narratives as he strives to bring clarity and context to complex issues. He currently tracks the energy sector, writing on power, renewable energy, coal and mines.Read MoreEnd of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosAtishi Hits Back At BJP: Rejects Rijiju’s Claims, Calls AAP a Fast-Growing Political ForceAtishi Targets Modi, BJP Over Rs 2500 Promise; Asks ‘When Will Delhi Women Get Money?’”Tharoor Accepted Congress Is Anti-Women”: Rijiju’s Claim Puts Party On BackfootAfter Kejriwal, Sisodia Recuses Himself From Excise Case Hearing Before Justice SharmaIndia ‘Condemns’ Strikes On Commercial Vessels At UNSC MeetMumbai-Solapur Vande Bharat Express Derails On Diamond Crossing While Entering Pune StationFour Killed, 70 Hurt As Taliban Blames Pak Strikes, Peace Hopes ShakenNDA Nears 2/3 Majority As NDA Numbers Swell in Rajya Sabha After AAP Exodus’Party Of Billionaires’: Congress Attacks AAP After 7 Rajya Sabha MPs Join BJPIran Attacks Togo-Flagged Tanker With 17 Indian Seafarers Near Oman; All Safe123PhotostoriesHow to make a small Bengaluru flat look bigger without spending much7 European vegetables that can grow in the balcony during this season“I am vegetarian, so I need to get my protein”: Sundar Pichai’s daily breakfast includes these 3 foodsIndia’s pilgrimage season is here: 10 pilgrimage sites to build your itinerary around4 harmful effects of screen time on child development5 dangerous pets that were created by humans against natureArsh Aulakh weds Mehreen Pirzada: Decoding the dreamy pink Anarkali Mehreen Pirzada wore for her Anand Karaj8 characteristics of investor-friendly residential locationsChef Pankaj Bhadouria’s High-Protein Paratha Premix offers 15 g protein per serving8 small behaviors of people who are always mentally sharp123Hot PicksAmit ShahMamata BanerjeeBengal Women VotersPM Rally GunfireAssembly Election 2026Bengal Oath CeremonyTrinamool CongressTop TrendingSaeed Sheikh AfridiTamil Nadu electionPM modiSalim DolaAssam HS 12th ResultManish SisodiaMumbai Watermelon Poisoning newsBengal PollsJack GrealishIPL Orange Cap

. NEW DELHI: Vedanta Power on Monday said it has completed disbursement of compensation to the families of those killed and injured in a boiler-related incident at its power plant in Chhattisgarh’s Sakti district earlier this month.In a statement, company said it has provided financial assistance of Rs 35 lakh each to families of the deceased, while Rs 15 lakh has been disbursed to those injured in the accident. “The compensation has already been released to all 35 affected individuals and families,” it said.Vedanta Power said it is also exploring employment opportunities for family members of the deceased and will support the education of their children up to Class 12. Skill development opportunities will be extended through its training centres to enhance employability of dependents.“We are deeply saddened by the loss of lives in this tragic incident. Our thoughts remain with the bereaved families, and we are committed to supporting them in every possible way,” Vedanta Power CEO Rajinder Singh Ahuja said.An explosion occurred in a steel tube carrying high-pressure steam at Unit-1 of company’s plant in Singhitarai on April 14, killing 25 and leaving several others severely injured. The unit was being operated and maintained by NTPC GE Power Services Ltd (NGSL), a joint venture of NTPC and GE, the company said. Chhattisgarh police have registered an FIR against Vedanta group chairman Anil Agarwal and others in this connection.About the AuthorAtul MathurAtul Mathur is a Senior Assistant Editor at The Times of India with over 27 years of experience in journalism. Based in Delhi, he has spent much of his career reporting on governance, public policy and politics, churning out researched, data-driven stories that impact daily lives. Atul is known for investigative depth and strong human-interest narratives as he strives to bring clarity and context to complex issues. He currently tracks the energy sector, writing on power, renewable energy, coal and mines.Read MoreEnd of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosAtishi Hits Back At BJP: Rejects Rijiju’s Claims, Calls AAP a Fast-Growing Political ForceAtishi Targets Modi, BJP Over Rs 2500 Promise; Asks ‘When Will Delhi Women Get Money?’”Tharoor Accepted Congress Is Anti-Women”: Rijiju’s Claim Puts Party On BackfootAfter Kejriwal, Sisodia Recuses Himself From Excise Case Hearing Before Justice SharmaIndia ‘Condemns’ Strikes On Commercial Vessels At UNSC MeetMumbai-Solapur Vande Bharat Express Derails On Diamond Crossing While Entering Pune StationFour Killed, 70 Hurt As Taliban Blames Pak Strikes, Peace Hopes ShakenNDA Nears 2/3 Majority As NDA Numbers Swell in Rajya Sabha After AAP Exodus’Party Of Billionaires’: Congress Attacks AAP After 7 Rajya Sabha MPs Join BJPIran Attacks Togo-Flagged Tanker With 17 Indian Seafarers Near Oman; All Safe123PhotostoriesHow to make a small Bengaluru flat look bigger without spending much7 European vegetables that can grow in the balcony during this season“I am vegetarian, so I need to get my protein”: Sundar Pichai’s daily breakfast includes these 3 foodsIndia’s pilgrimage season is here: 10 pilgrimage sites to build your itinerary around4 harmful effects of screen time on child development5 dangerous pets that were created by humans against natureArsh Aulakh weds Mehreen Pirzada: Decoding the dreamy pink Anarkali Mehreen Pirzada wore for her Anand Karaj8 characteristics of investor-friendly residential locationsChef Pankaj Bhadouria’s High-Protein Paratha Premix offers 15 g protein per serving8 small behaviors of people who are always mentally sharp123Hot PicksAmit ShahMamata BanerjeeBengal Women VotersPM Rally GunfireAssembly Election 2026Bengal Oath CeremonyTrinamool CongressTop TrendingSaeed Sheikh AfridiTamil Nadu electionPM modiSalim DolaAssam HS 12th ResultManish SisodiaMumbai Watermelon Poisoning newsBengal PollsJack GrealishIPL Orange Cap

Vamsikrishna 0
File photo NEW DELHI: Union minister for parliamentary affairs Kiren Rijiju on Tuesday shared a post-session exchange with Congress MP Shashi Tharoor to sharpen his attack on the opposition over the defeat of the Women’s Reservation Amendment Bill, claiming even Tharoor “agreed” with his remark that the Congress could be seen as anti-women.”We took a picture. Shashi Tharoor, when the parliament session was over, in the hall, he told me… but no woman will consider Shashi Tharoor is opposed to women. I said, yes, no one will call you women’s opposition,” Rijiju said in an interview with ANI.”That was what he meant. That Congress can be anti-women, but women will not consider Shashi Tharoor as anti-women… he agreed in a way,” he added.The minister also hit out at opposition parties for opposing the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, which sought to provide 33% reservation for women in Parliament and state assemblies from the 2029 Lok Sabha polls.“Who would think that someone would vote against women? We don’t have a two-thirds majority… But who would have thought even in a dream that Congress, TMC, Samajwadi Party would vote against women?” Rijiju said.He added that opposition parties “will have to face the anger of women” for opposing the bill, arguing that the issue should not be viewed through a political lens. Rijiju rejected the opposition’s argument that the bill unfairly linked women’s reservation to delimitation.”They say delimitation was linked… It is written in the 2023 law that delimitation will take place after the 2026 census and it will be implemented. Why was it not opposed then?” he said.He also dismissed concerns about the impact on southern states, saying the government had clarified that seat numbers would increase uniformly across states, along with 33% reservation for women.On demands to implement women’s reservation within the existing strength of 543 Lok Sabha seats, Rijiju argued that the current system is outdated.”Seats were fixed on the basis of 1971 population… some seats have 30 lakh or 40 lakh voters. Is this how democracy should work?” he said, adding that population-to-seat ratios in India are far higher than in many other countries.Opposition parties had opposed the Constitution Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha on April 17. In the division, 298 MPs voted in favour while 230 voted against, leading to its defeat.Following this, the government said it would not pursue two other linked bills. The proposals had aimed to increase the Lok Sabha’s strength from 543 to 816 seats, with 33% reservation for women, alongside delimitation based on the 2011 census.About the AuthorTOI News DeskThe TOI News Desk comprises a dedicated and tireless team of journalists who operate around the clock to deliver the most current and comprehensive news and updates to the readers of The Times of India worldwide. With an unwavering commitment to excellence in journalism, our team is at the forefront of gathering, verifying, and presenting breaking news, in-depth analysis, and insightful reports on a wide range of topics. The TOI News Desk is your trusted source for staying informed and connected to the ever-evolving global landscape, ensuring that our readers are equipped with the latest developments that matter most.”Read MoreEnd of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosAtishi Targets Modi, BJP Over Rs 2500 Promise; Asks ‘When Will Delhi Women Get Money?’”Tharoor Accepted Congress Is Anti-Women”: Rijiju’s Claim Puts Party On BackfootAfter Kejriwal, Sisodia Recuses Himself From Excise Case Hearing Before Justice SharmaIndia ‘Condemns’ Strikes On Commercial Vessels At UNSC MeetMumbai-Solapur Vande Bharat Express Derails On Diamond Crossing While Entering Pune StationFour Killed, 70 Hurt As Taliban Blames Pak Strikes, Peace Hopes ShakenNDA Nears 2/3 Majority As NDA Numbers Swell in Rajya Sabha After AAP Exodus’Party Of Billionaires’: Congress Attacks AAP After 7 Rajya Sabha MPs Join BJPIran Attacks Togo-Flagged Tanker With 17 Indian Seafarers Near Oman; All Safe’Once-in-a-Generation’ India Signs Free Trade Agreement With New Zealand After a Decade of Talks123Photostories7 European vegetables that can grow in the balcony during this season“I am vegetarian, so I need to get my protein”: Sundar Pichai’s daily breakfast includes these 3 foodsIndia’s pilgrimage season is here: 10 pilgrimage sites to build your itinerary around4 harmful effects of screen time on child development5 dangerous pets that were created by humans against natureArsh Aulakh weds Mehreen Pirzada: Decoding the dreamy pink Anarkali Mehreen Pirzada wore for her Anand Karaj8 characteristics of investor-friendly residential locationsChef Pankaj Bhadouria’s High-Protein Paratha Premix offers 15 g protein per serving8 small behaviors of people who are always mentally sharp5 animals that breathe through their skin (and why can’t humans do the same)123Hot PicksAmit ShahMamata BanerjeeBengal Women VotersPM Rally GunfireAssembly Election 2026Bengal Oath CeremonyTrinamool CongressTop TrendingSaeed Sheikh AfridiTamil Nadu electionPM modiSalim DolaAssam HS 12th ResultManish SisodiaMumbai Watermelon Poisoning newsBengal PollsJack GrealishIPL Orange Cap

File photo NEW DELHI: Union minister for parliamentary affairs Kiren Rijiju on Tuesday shared a post-session exchange with Congress MP Shashi Tharoor to sharpen his attack on the opposition over the defeat of the Women’s Reservation Amendment Bill, claiming even Tharoor “agreed” with his remark that the Congress could be seen as anti-women.”We took a picture. Shashi Tharoor, when the parliament session was over, in the hall, he told me… but no woman will consider Shashi Tharoor is opposed to women. I said, yes, no one will call you women’s opposition,” Rijiju said in an interview with ANI.”That was what he meant. That Congress can be anti-women, but women will not consider Shashi Tharoor as anti-women… he agreed in a way,” he added.The minister also hit out at opposition parties for opposing the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, which sought to provide 33% reservation for women in Parliament and state assemblies from the 2029 Lok Sabha polls.“Who would think that someone would vote against women? We don’t have a two-thirds majority… But who would have thought even in a dream that Congress, TMC, Samajwadi Party would vote against women?” Rijiju said.He added that opposition parties “will have to face the anger of women” for opposing the bill, arguing that the issue should not be viewed through a political lens. Rijiju rejected the opposition’s argument that the bill unfairly linked women’s reservation to delimitation.”They say delimitation was linked… It is written in the 2023 law that delimitation will take place after the 2026 census and it will be implemented. Why was it not opposed then?” he said.He also dismissed concerns about the impact on southern states, saying the government had clarified that seat numbers would increase uniformly across states, along with 33% reservation for women.On demands to implement women’s reservation within the existing strength of 543 Lok Sabha seats, Rijiju argued that the current system is outdated.”Seats were fixed on the basis of 1971 population… some seats have 30 lakh or 40 lakh voters. Is this how democracy should work?” he said, adding that population-to-seat ratios in India are far higher than in many other countries.Opposition parties had opposed the Constitution Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha on April 17. In the division, 298 MPs voted in favour while 230 voted against, leading to its defeat.Following this, the government said it would not pursue two other linked bills. The proposals had aimed to increase the Lok Sabha’s strength from 543 to 816 seats, with 33% reservation for women, alongside delimitation based on the 2011 census.About the AuthorTOI News DeskThe TOI News Desk comprises a dedicated and tireless team of journalists who operate around the clock to deliver the most current and comprehensive news and updates to the readers of The Times of India worldwide. With an unwavering commitment to excellence in journalism, our team is at the forefront of gathering, verifying, and presenting breaking news, in-depth analysis, and insightful reports on a wide range of topics. The TOI News Desk is your trusted source for staying informed and connected to the ever-evolving global landscape, ensuring that our readers are equipped with the latest developments that matter most.”Read MoreEnd of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosAtishi Targets Modi, BJP Over Rs 2500 Promise; Asks ‘When Will Delhi Women Get Money?’”Tharoor Accepted Congress Is Anti-Women”: Rijiju’s Claim Puts Party On BackfootAfter Kejriwal, Sisodia Recuses Himself From Excise Case Hearing Before Justice SharmaIndia ‘Condemns’ Strikes On Commercial Vessels At UNSC MeetMumbai-Solapur Vande Bharat Express Derails On Diamond Crossing While Entering Pune StationFour Killed, 70 Hurt As Taliban Blames Pak Strikes, Peace Hopes ShakenNDA Nears 2/3 Majority As NDA Numbers Swell in Rajya Sabha After AAP Exodus’Party Of Billionaires’: Congress Attacks AAP After 7 Rajya Sabha MPs Join BJPIran Attacks Togo-Flagged Tanker With 17 Indian Seafarers Near Oman; All Safe’Once-in-a-Generation’ India Signs Free Trade Agreement With New Zealand After a Decade of Talks123Photostories7 European vegetables that can grow in the balcony during this season“I am vegetarian, so I need to get my protein”: Sundar Pichai’s daily breakfast includes these 3 foodsIndia’s pilgrimage season is here: 10 pilgrimage sites to build your itinerary around4 harmful effects of screen time on child development5 dangerous pets that were created by humans against natureArsh Aulakh weds Mehreen Pirzada: Decoding the dreamy pink Anarkali Mehreen Pirzada wore for her Anand Karaj8 characteristics of investor-friendly residential locationsChef Pankaj Bhadouria’s High-Protein Paratha Premix offers 15 g protein per serving8 small behaviors of people who are always mentally sharp5 animals that breathe through their skin (and why can’t humans do the same)123Hot PicksAmit ShahMamata BanerjeeBengal Women VotersPM Rally GunfireAssembly Election 2026Bengal Oath CeremonyTrinamool CongressTop TrendingSaeed Sheikh AfridiTamil Nadu electionPM modiSalim DolaAssam HS 12th ResultManish SisodiaMumbai Watermelon Poisoning newsBengal PollsJack GrealishIPL Orange Cap

Vamsikrishna 0
NEW DELHI: The legal battle over the Delhi excise policy case has taken an unusual turn, with Aam Aadmi Party leaders Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia refusing to appear before the Delhi high court bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. The controversy erupted after the court rejected Kejriwal’s plea seeking the judge’s recusal from hearing the matter.In a detailed order, the Delhi high court strongly defended judicial independence and held that allegations against the judge were unsupported by evidence. The court said recusal cannot be granted merely on perceptions, doubts or suspicions, warning that such pleas could damage public faith in the justice system.Also read – ‘Hope of getting justice shattered’: Arvind Kejriwal refuses to appear before court, writes to Justice Swarana KantaDelhi high court rejects recusal pleaJustice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed Arvind Kejriwal’s application seeking her recusal from the Delhi excise policy case. The court held that the plea failed to meet the legal threshold required to establish a reasonable apprehension of bias. It said the allegations were “based on conjectures and insinuations” rather than concrete material.The judgment stated that recusal cannot be sought simply because one party believes a judge may not rule in its favour. The court noted that such pleas must be backed by objective facts. It further warned that allowing unsupported recusal requests would undermine the institutional credibility of courts.Also read – After Arvind Kejriwal, now Manish Sisodia ‘recuses’ himself from liquor case hearing before Delhi high court judge Swarna Kanta Sharma Court says no proof of biasThe high court examined the allegations raised by Kejriwal and found no evidence of bias. It stressed that judges are presumed impartial unless proven otherwise through clear and compelling material. The order said personal apprehensions or subjective fears cannot substitute for legal proof.Justice Sharma observed that “The application did not arrive with evidence; it came with aspersions, insinuations and doubts cast on my integrity, fairness and impartiality.” The court said accepting such claims without evidence would create a dangerous precedent. It also made clear that criticism of prior judicial orders or dissatisfaction with proceedings cannot be treated as proof of prejudice. AAP objects to judge’s family links claimKejriwal and later Sisodia alleged a conflict of interest, claiming that Justice Sharma’s children are empanelled as lawyers for the central government. They argued that because the Union government is involved through the CBI and represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the situation created apprehensions about fairness.The high court rejected this argument and said no direct connection or “nexus” had been shown between the judge’s family members and the present case. The court held that judges’ family members cannot be barred from pursuing legal careers merely because of their relationship to a judge. Role of bar events also questionedAnother objection raised by Kejriwal related to Justice Sharma’s participation in events organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad. The AAP leader cited this as part of his concern over ideological neutrality in the matter.The court rejected the allegation and clarified that judges routinely attend legal, academic and professional programmes organised by multiple associations. It said participation in such events cannot automatically be equated with political affiliation or bias. Justice Sharma noted that no political statement, conduct or adjudicatory action had been cited to support claims of ideological prejudice. Kejriwal refuses to appear before benchAfter losing the recusal plea, Arvind Kejriwal announced that he would neither appear personally nor through legal counsel before Justice Sharma in the excise policy proceedings. In a public statement, he said his “hope of receiving justice… has been shattered.”Kejriwal said he had reached a “clear conclusion” that the principle that justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done was not being met in the case. He added, “My hope of receiving justice… has been shattered. Listening to my conscience and adhering to the principles of Mahatma Gandhi, I have decided not to appear before her in this case.” He also said he retained full faith in the judiciary as an institution and could approach the Supreme Court against the recusal order.Sisodia follows with similar boycottA day after Kejriwal’s announcement, former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia wrote to the court stating that neither he nor any lawyer would appear on his behalf before the same bench. This escalated the confrontation between AAP leaders and the high court.In his letter, Sisodia repeated concerns about the judge’s family links to the central government legal panel. He said the “future of your children lies in the hands of” Tushar Mehta and added that he had “no hope for justice.” Sisodia further said he would instead follow the path of Satyagraha. Court warns against forum shoppingThe high court’s order strongly cautioned against attempts by litigants to seek a preferred bench by raising unsupported allegations against judges. It said such practices could encourage delays and distort the judicial process.Justice Sharma observed that accepting pleas based on unverified suspicions would open the “floodgates” to forum shopping. The court also said “A litigant cannot be allowed to put the judiciary on trial.” It stressed that if parties were allowed to engineer recusals through accusations, judicial proceedings would become vulnerable to manipulation.Also read – ‘You put judiciary on trial’: Delhi high court judge Swarana Kanta Sharma’s sharp words while junking Arvind Kejriwal’s recusal plea Prior orders cannot justify recusalKejriwal had also cited earlier orders passed by Justice Sharma in connected excise policy matters, arguing that these decisions showed a pattern against the accused. The court rejected this submission.The high court said adverse judicial rulings cannot form the basis for recusal. It noted that if a party believes an order is legally wrong, the remedy lies in appeal before a higher court, not in seeking transfer of the case to another judge. The judgment underscored that judges routinely decide contentious matters and one side’s dissatisfaction with earlier outcomes cannot be treated as evidence of partiality. Political reactions sharpen disputeThe legal confrontation quickly spilled into the political arena. Kejriwal, who was campaigning in Tamil Nadu with Chief Minister M. K. Stalin, initially said he had not read the detailed high court order and declined to comment extensively.The BJP, however, launched a sharp attack on the AAP chief. Party leaders accused Kejriwal of attempting to pressure the judiciary and turning a court process into a political spectacle. The episode has intensified partisan exchanges, with AAP framing it as a matter of fairness and BJP presenting it as an attack on institutions. The controversy is likely to remain politically charged as the case progresses.What is Excise policy case? The dispute stems from the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22, which has been investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Enforcement Directorate. The case has led to arrests, resignations and prolonged litigation involving top AAP leaders.A trial court had earlier discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and others in the alleged corruption case. The CBI challenged that decision before the Delhi high court, bringing the matter before Justice Sharma’s bench. With the recusal plea dismissed and the boycott announced by the AAP leaders, the high court is expected to decide how proceedings move forward.About the AuthorTOI News DeskThe TOI News Desk comprises a dedicated and tireless team of journalists who operate around the clock to deliver the most current and comprehensive news and updates to the readers of The Times of India worldwide. With an unwavering commitment to excellence in journalism, our team is at the forefront of gathering, verifying, and presenting breaking news, in-depth analysis, and insightful reports on a wide range of topics. The TOI News Desk is your trusted source for staying informed and connected to the ever-evolving global landscape, ensuring that our readers are equipped with the latest developments that matter most.”Read MoreEnd of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideos”Tharoor Accepted Congress Is Anti-Women”: Rijiju’s Claim Puts Party On BackfootAfter Kejriwal, Sisodia Recuses Himself From Excise Case Hearing Before Justice SharmaIndia ‘Condemns’ Strikes On Commercial Vessels At UNSC MeetMumbai-Solapur Vande Bharat Express Derails On Diamond Crossing While Entering Pune StationFour Killed, 70 Hurt As Taliban Blames Pak Strikes, Peace Hopes ShakenNDA Nears 2/3 Majority As NDA Numbers Swell in Rajya Sabha After AAP Exodus’Party Of Billionaires’: Congress Attacks AAP After 7 Rajya Sabha MPs Join BJPIran Attacks Togo-Flagged Tanker With 17 Indian Seafarers Near Oman; All Safe’Once-in-a-Generation’ India Signs Free Trade Agreement With New Zealand After a Decade of Talks’Attack By BJP Goons’: TMC MP Mitali Bag’s Car Vandalised In Hooghly, BJP Denies TMC’s Charge123Photostories7 European vegetables that can grow in the balcony during this season“I am vegetarian, so I need to get my protein”: Sundar Pichai’s daily breakfast includes these 3 foodsIndia’s pilgrimage season is here: 10 pilgrimage sites to build your itinerary around4 harmful effects of screen time on child development5 dangerous pets that were created by humans against natureArsh Aulakh weds Mehreen Pirzada: Decoding the dreamy pink Anarkali Mehreen Pirzada wore for her Anand Karaj8 characteristics of investor-friendly residential locationsChef Pankaj Bhadouria’s High-Protein Paratha Premix offers 15 g protein per serving8 small behaviors of people who are always mentally sharp5 animals that breathe through their skin (and why can’t humans do the same)123Hot PicksAmit ShahMamata BanerjeeBengal Women VotersPM Rally GunfireAssembly Election 2026Bengal Oath CeremonyTrinamool CongressTop TrendingSaeed Sheikh AfridiTamil Nadu electionNFL Trade RumorsPetrol Diesel PriceAssam HS 12th ResultJac Class 12 ResultPatrick MahomesBengal PollsJack GrealishIPL Orange Cap

NEW DELHI: The legal battle over the Delhi excise policy case has taken an unusual turn, with Aam Aadmi Party leaders Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia refusing to appear before the Delhi high court bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. The controversy erupted after the court rejected Kejriwal’s plea seeking the judge’s recusal from hearing the matter.In a detailed order, the Delhi high court strongly defended judicial independence and held that allegations against the judge were unsupported by evidence. The court said recusal cannot be granted merely on perceptions, doubts or suspicions, warning that such pleas could damage public faith in the justice system.Also read – ‘Hope of getting justice shattered’: Arvind Kejriwal refuses to appear before court, writes to Justice Swarana KantaDelhi high court rejects recusal pleaJustice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed Arvind Kejriwal’s application seeking her recusal from the Delhi excise policy case. The court held that the plea failed to meet the legal threshold required to establish a reasonable apprehension of bias. It said the allegations were “based on conjectures and insinuations” rather than concrete material.The judgment stated that recusal cannot be sought simply because one party believes a judge may not rule in its favour. The court noted that such pleas must be backed by objective facts. It further warned that allowing unsupported recusal requests would undermine the institutional credibility of courts.Also read – After Arvind Kejriwal, now Manish Sisodia ‘recuses’ himself from liquor case hearing before Delhi high court judge Swarna Kanta Sharma Court says no proof of biasThe high court examined the allegations raised by Kejriwal and found no evidence of bias. It stressed that judges are presumed impartial unless proven otherwise through clear and compelling material. The order said personal apprehensions or subjective fears cannot substitute for legal proof.Justice Sharma observed that “The application did not arrive with evidence; it came with aspersions, insinuations and doubts cast on my integrity, fairness and impartiality.” The court said accepting such claims without evidence would create a dangerous precedent. It also made clear that criticism of prior judicial orders or dissatisfaction with proceedings cannot be treated as proof of prejudice. AAP objects to judge’s family links claimKejriwal and later Sisodia alleged a conflict of interest, claiming that Justice Sharma’s children are empanelled as lawyers for the central government. They argued that because the Union government is involved through the CBI and represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the situation created apprehensions about fairness.The high court rejected this argument and said no direct connection or “nexus” had been shown between the judge’s family members and the present case. The court held that judges’ family members cannot be barred from pursuing legal careers merely because of their relationship to a judge. Role of bar events also questionedAnother objection raised by Kejriwal related to Justice Sharma’s participation in events organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad. The AAP leader cited this as part of his concern over ideological neutrality in the matter.The court rejected the allegation and clarified that judges routinely attend legal, academic and professional programmes organised by multiple associations. It said participation in such events cannot automatically be equated with political affiliation or bias. Justice Sharma noted that no political statement, conduct or adjudicatory action had been cited to support claims of ideological prejudice. Kejriwal refuses to appear before benchAfter losing the recusal plea, Arvind Kejriwal announced that he would neither appear personally nor through legal counsel before Justice Sharma in the excise policy proceedings. In a public statement, he said his “hope of receiving justice… has been shattered.”Kejriwal said he had reached a “clear conclusion” that the principle that justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done was not being met in the case. He added, “My hope of receiving justice… has been shattered. Listening to my conscience and adhering to the principles of Mahatma Gandhi, I have decided not to appear before her in this case.” He also said he retained full faith in the judiciary as an institution and could approach the Supreme Court against the recusal order.Sisodia follows with similar boycottA day after Kejriwal’s announcement, former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia wrote to the court stating that neither he nor any lawyer would appear on his behalf before the same bench. This escalated the confrontation between AAP leaders and the high court.In his letter, Sisodia repeated concerns about the judge’s family links to the central government legal panel. He said the “future of your children lies in the hands of” Tushar Mehta and added that he had “no hope for justice.” Sisodia further said he would instead follow the path of Satyagraha. Court warns against forum shoppingThe high court’s order strongly cautioned against attempts by litigants to seek a preferred bench by raising unsupported allegations against judges. It said such practices could encourage delays and distort the judicial process.Justice Sharma observed that accepting pleas based on unverified suspicions would open the “floodgates” to forum shopping. The court also said “A litigant cannot be allowed to put the judiciary on trial.” It stressed that if parties were allowed to engineer recusals through accusations, judicial proceedings would become vulnerable to manipulation.Also read – ‘You put judiciary on trial’: Delhi high court judge Swarana Kanta Sharma’s sharp words while junking Arvind Kejriwal’s recusal plea Prior orders cannot justify recusalKejriwal had also cited earlier orders passed by Justice Sharma in connected excise policy matters, arguing that these decisions showed a pattern against the accused. The court rejected this submission.The high court said adverse judicial rulings cannot form the basis for recusal. It noted that if a party believes an order is legally wrong, the remedy lies in appeal before a higher court, not in seeking transfer of the case to another judge. The judgment underscored that judges routinely decide contentious matters and one side’s dissatisfaction with earlier outcomes cannot be treated as evidence of partiality. Political reactions sharpen disputeThe legal confrontation quickly spilled into the political arena. Kejriwal, who was campaigning in Tamil Nadu with Chief Minister M. K. Stalin, initially said he had not read the detailed high court order and declined to comment extensively.The BJP, however, launched a sharp attack on the AAP chief. Party leaders accused Kejriwal of attempting to pressure the judiciary and turning a court process into a political spectacle. The episode has intensified partisan exchanges, with AAP framing it as a matter of fairness and BJP presenting it as an attack on institutions. The controversy is likely to remain politically charged as the case progresses.What is Excise policy case? The dispute stems from the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22, which has been investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Enforcement Directorate. The case has led to arrests, resignations and prolonged litigation involving top AAP leaders.A trial court had earlier discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and others in the alleged corruption case. The CBI challenged that decision before the Delhi high court, bringing the matter before Justice Sharma’s bench. With the recusal plea dismissed and the boycott announced by the AAP leaders, the high court is expected to decide how proceedings move forward.About the AuthorTOI News DeskThe TOI News Desk comprises a dedicated and tireless team of journalists who operate around the clock to deliver the most current and comprehensive news and updates to the readers of The Times of India worldwide. With an unwavering commitment to excellence in journalism, our team is at the forefront of gathering, verifying, and presenting breaking news, in-depth analysis, and insightful reports on a wide range of topics. The TOI News Desk is your trusted source for staying informed and connected to the ever-evolving global landscape, ensuring that our readers are equipped with the latest developments that matter most.”Read MoreEnd of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideos”Tharoor Accepted Congress Is Anti-Women”: Rijiju’s Claim Puts Party On BackfootAfter Kejriwal, Sisodia Recuses Himself From Excise Case Hearing Before Justice SharmaIndia ‘Condemns’ Strikes On Commercial Vessels At UNSC MeetMumbai-Solapur Vande Bharat Express Derails On Diamond Crossing While Entering Pune StationFour Killed, 70 Hurt As Taliban Blames Pak Strikes, Peace Hopes ShakenNDA Nears 2/3 Majority As NDA Numbers Swell in Rajya Sabha After AAP Exodus’Party Of Billionaires’: Congress Attacks AAP After 7 Rajya Sabha MPs Join BJPIran Attacks Togo-Flagged Tanker With 17 Indian Seafarers Near Oman; All Safe’Once-in-a-Generation’ India Signs Free Trade Agreement With New Zealand After a Decade of Talks’Attack By BJP Goons’: TMC MP Mitali Bag’s Car Vandalised In Hooghly, BJP Denies TMC’s Charge123Photostories7 European vegetables that can grow in the balcony during this season“I am vegetarian, so I need to get my protein”: Sundar Pichai’s daily breakfast includes these 3 foodsIndia’s pilgrimage season is here: 10 pilgrimage sites to build your itinerary around4 harmful effects of screen time on child development5 dangerous pets that were created by humans against natureArsh Aulakh weds Mehreen Pirzada: Decoding the dreamy pink Anarkali Mehreen Pirzada wore for her Anand Karaj8 characteristics of investor-friendly residential locationsChef Pankaj Bhadouria’s High-Protein Paratha Premix offers 15 g protein per serving8 small behaviors of people who are always mentally sharp5 animals that breathe through their skin (and why can’t humans do the same)123Hot PicksAmit ShahMamata BanerjeeBengal Women VotersPM Rally GunfireAssembly Election 2026Bengal Oath CeremonyTrinamool CongressTop TrendingSaeed Sheikh AfridiTamil Nadu electionNFL Trade RumorsPetrol Diesel PriceAssam HS 12th ResultJac Class 12 ResultPatrick MahomesBengal PollsJack GrealishIPL Orange Cap

Vamsikrishna 0