The CBI strongly opposed a plea by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal and others to delay proceedings in thematter relating to the alleged liquor “scam”in the Delhi High Court on Monday (March 16), with Solicitor General of India (SG) Tushar Mehta declaring that the accused had “made a career out of [making] allegations”.
During the hearing of the criminal revision petition filed by the CBI against the trial court order of February 27 discharging Kejriwal and 22 other accused in the liquor policy case, counsel for accused informed Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the High Court that a petition by special leave (SLP) had been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the HC’s order of March 9 that had deferred the trial court’s proceedings in the ED case stemming from the CBI case.
None of the 23 accused in the case have filed their responses to the contentions raised in the CBI’s petition challenging the trial court’s order.
Seeking time to do that, and also informing Justice Sharma of the SLP, senior advocate Hariharan, who appeared for one of the accused, sought an adjournment.
SG Mehta vehemently opposed the request.
“…If this is the ground for adjournment they must ensure that it is listed this week.
It cannot be kept pending…,” he said.
“This is a matter which has several facets apart from the legal facets.
Replies and rejoinders may not be necessary.
Court may not grant more than one week… [The trial court has passed a] very exceptionable order.
It (trial court’s order) can’t remain on the record even a second more… This has become a pattern… Make allegations and run away… Such litigants cannot be encouraged.
They have made a career out of allegations… I’m objecting to anything more than a week,” Mehta argued.
Hariharan and senior advocate Shadan Farasat, who appeared for another accused, pushed back, contending there was no urgency.
Hariharan countered Mehta: “Just because [the trial court’s] order is not in your favour, that’s why it’s perverse?” Farasat said: “Just because the CBI has been called out by the judge…”.
Justice Sharma granted time to the accused to file their responses, and listed the matter for further hearing on April 6.
Kejriwal has moved the Supreme Court challenging theDelhiHC’s administrative communication rejecting his request to transfer the CBI plea against the discharge of the accused to another judge.
Additionally, a petition has been filed in the SC challenging the March 9 order of the Delhi HC.
On February 27, a trial court had discharged all 23 accused in the CBI’s case, including Kejriwal and former Delhi Deputy Chief MinisterManish Sisodia, and made negative observations against the Investigating Officer (IO).
After the CBI challenged the order, the HC on March 9 stayed the trial court’s observations recommending departmental action against the IO.
The order was passed ex parte after no one appeared on behalf of the accused.
In her order, Justice Sharma said that the stay had been necessitated by “certain factual discrepancies” in the trial court’s order.
The High Court said that some of the trial court’s observations regarding statements of witnesses and approvers, made at the stage of charge itself, prima facie appeared to be “erroneous”.
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express.
Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond.
She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers.
Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh...
Read More
Related Stories
Source: This article was originally published by The Indian Express
Read Full Original Article →
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!
Leave a Comment