NEW DELHI — The Delhi High Court on Monday, March 16, 2026, granted former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy CM Manish Sisodia, and 21 other accused individuals time to file their formal responses to a CBI petition. The federal agency is currently challenging a trial court’s decision to discharge the leaders in the high-profile excise policy case. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, presiding over the matter, has scheduled the next hearing for April 6, 2026.
During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the CBI, pushed for a swift timeline, arguing that the trial court’s discharge order was “perverse” and should not remain on record any longer than necessary. He contended that since the entire trial court record is already available, a lengthy response period was unnecessary and suggested a maximum of one week for the accused to reply. However, senior counsel representing the AAP leadership argued for “reasonable time,” noting the complexity of the matter and the lack of immediate urgency.
The court’s decision to move forward comes despite revelations from the defense that they have already approached the Supreme Court to challenge the proceedings. Justice Sharma remarked that in the absence of an official stay order from the top court, the High Court is obligated to proceed with the CBI’s revision petition. This follows a landmark February 27 ruling by a trial court that cleared Kejriwal and his associates of all charges, describing the CBI’s investigation as a “speculative construct” resting on “conjecture and surmise” rather than admissible evidence.
The trial court had previously criticized the agency, stating that forcing the accused to endure a full criminal trial without legally sound material would be a failure of justice. The CBI, however, remains steadfast in its attempt to overturn that discharge, maintaining that the evidence provided was sufficient for a trial. As the legal battle shifts between the High Court and the Supreme Court, the April 6 hearing stands as the next major milestone in a case that has dominated the national political and legal landscape for years.
