Legal – Delhi High Court Judge Steps Aside in Karti Chidambaram Case
Legal – A judge of the Delhi High Court on Tuesday chose not to hear a petition filed by Congress MP Karti Chidambaram, who has challenged a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) case registered against him. The case relates to alleged irregularities in the sale of duty-free liquor.
Judge Withdraws From Hearing
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while taking up the matter, stated that she would not be able to continue with the hearing and directed the court registry to assign the case to another bench. Without providing detailed reasons in open court, she remarked that the matter should be placed elsewhere. The next hearing is expected to take place on July 21 before a different bench.
Linked Petition Also Reassigned
During the brief proceedings, the court also addressed a related petition filed by Advantage Strategic Consulting Private Limited (ASCPL). The company, identified in the case as being associated with Karti Chidambaram and his associate S Bhaskararaman, has also been named as an accused in the investigation. Justice Sharma indicated that this connected matter would likewise be transferred to another bench for consideration.
Background of the Case
The CBI registered the First Information Report (FIR) on January 1, 2025, citing alleged procedural violations connected to duty-free whisky sales. Investigators are examining whether there were irregular approvals or undue benefits linked to the transactions under scrutiny.
Karti Chidambaram, through his petition, has contested the FIR and sought its dismissal. He has argued that the registration of the case came after an unreasonable delay and lacks legal justification.
Allegations of Delay and Bias
In his plea, the Congress MP has pointed to what he describes as a “gross delay” in initiating the investigation. According to his submission, the timing of the FIR raises concerns about the intent behind the case. He has further claimed that the action is politically motivated and not grounded in genuine investigative necessity.
The petition emphasizes that the delay has affected his legal rights and questions the credibility of the process followed by the investigating agency.
Next Steps in Proceedings
With the recusal of Justice Sharma, both the main petition and the related plea by ASCPL will now be placed before another bench of the Delhi High Court. The reassignment is expected to ensure that the matter proceeds without procedural complications.
Legal experts note that recusal is not uncommon in judicial proceedings and can occur for various reasons, including maintaining impartiality or avoiding potential conflicts. The court’s decision to transfer the case ensures continuity while upholding judicial standards.
The upcoming hearing will likely focus on the maintainability of the petition and whether the FIR should be quashed at this stage. The court may also examine the arguments related to delay and alleged bias before deciding on further action.