Atishi raises questions on judicial impartiality in the Excise Policy case, citing a conflict of interest involving a Delhi HC judge’s children. Read more.
Senior Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and Delhi Minister Atishi has stirred a major legal and political debate regarding the integrity of court proceedings. In a recent statement, Atishi raises questions on judicial impartiality concerning the ongoing Excise Policy case, pointing toward a potential “conflict of interest” involving a high court judge and the Central Government.
Allegations of Conflict of Interest
The controversy erupted after Atishi shared a detailed post on her official X (formerly Twitter) handle. She highlighted that the son and daughter of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma—Ishan Sharma and Shambhavi Sharma—are currently serving as panel counsels for the Government of India. These appointments reportedly took place in 2025.
While addressing the media, Atishi raises questions on judicial impartiality by pointing out that these panel lawyers work directly under Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta. Mehta is the same official representing the CBI and the Centre in the politically sensitive Excise Policy case before Justice Sharma’s bench.
The Role of the Solicitor General
Atishi emphasized that the Solicitor General holds the power to decide the allocation of cases to panel lawyers, which directly impacts their professional growth and income. Consequently, Atishi raises questions on judicial impartiality, arguing that when a judge’s family members are professionally dependent on the government’s top legal officer, it creates a cloud of suspicion over the fairness of the trial.
also read:- Saurabh Bharadwaj Raises Questions On Judicial Bias In…
Another explosive piece by @SauravDassss
In his previous article he showed how Justice Swarnakanta was giving unusually short dates in the Excise Policy revision petition filed by CBI, after the case was thrown out by the trial court.
This investigative piece shows that both… https://t.co/RwPuaoOYmG
— Atishi (@AtishiAAP) April 9, 2026
“Justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. How can there be transparency when such deep professional links exist?” — Atishi
Concerns Over Unusual Hearing Dates
The AAP leader also drew attention to the speed of the legal proceedings. She noted that in the revision petition filed by the CBI, the court has been granting unusually short intervals between hearing dates. This sense of urgency, combined with the familial links to the government’s legal panel, is why Atishi raises questions on judicial impartiality.
It is important to note that the trial court had previously discharged several AAP leaders in this matter, a decision that the CBI has now challenged in the High Court.
Demand for Transparency in the Judiciary
As the legal battle intensifies, the Aam Aadmi Party is calling for a more transparent mechanism to handle cases where potential conflicts of interest arise. By bringing these facts into the public domain, Atishi raises questions on judicial impartiality to ensure that the democratic pillars of the country remain untainted by political influence.
While the judiciary has yet to respond to these specific allegations, the political temperature in the capital continues to rise. The fact that Atishi raises questions on judicial impartiality at such a critical juncture of the Excise Policy case suggests that the party is prepared for a long-drawn battle for transparency.
For More Hindi News: http://newz24india.com