Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma recused herself from hearing the Delhi Excise Policy case on May 14, 2026 [1].

The decision disrupts the legal proceedings of a high-profile investigation involving top political figures, potentially delaying the resolution of the excise policy dispute.

The recusal follows allegations of bias and conflict of interest raised by leaders of the Aam Aadmi Party [2]. These claims coincided with the emergence of social-media posts that the court deemed defamatory [2].

In response to these posts, Justice Sharma initiated contempt proceedings [2]. The move signals a judicial crackdown on public commentary that undermines the integrity of the court while the excise case remains active.

Separate from the recusal, the Delhi High Court had previously scheduled a hearing for May 11, 2026 [3]. That session was intended to address a petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation regarding the discharge of Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia [3].

The shift in judicial oversight comes as the court balances the need for an impartial trial against the necessity of maintaining judicial authority. The recusal ensures that the case is heard by a judge without perceived conflicts, though the accompanying contempt case adds a new layer of legal friction between the judiciary and political actors [2].

“Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma recused herself from hearing the Delhi Excise Policy case”

This development highlights the volatility of the Delhi Excise Policy case, where legal battles are now intersecting with accusations of judicial bias and contempt of court. By recusing herself while simultaneously pursuing contempt charges, Justice Sharma is separating the merits of the excise case from the conduct of the parties involved, ensuring the former is handled by a different bench to avoid further claims of partiality.