In one of the most unusual legal developments in India’s political history, former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor Arvind Kejriwal represented himself in the Delhi High Court last week. However, he presented his stand not on the much talked about excise policy issue, but on the petition in which he demanded the removal of the judge hearing the case.

Delhi High Court Judge Swarn Kanta Sharma is going to give her verdict on Monday (April 20, 2026) at 4.30 pm whether she should recuse herself from this case. In such a situation, questions are also being raised that who is Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma, who has come at the center of one of the most talked about legal controversies of India.

Who is Justice Swarna Kant Sharma?

The career of Delhi High Court judge Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma started at an early age. According to the information available on the High Court website, Justice Sharma was selected as the best all-round student of the year during her graduation in English Literature from Daulat Ram College, Delhi University. He obtained LLB degree in 1991 and LLM degree in 2004.

At the same time, in the year 2025, he also completed his PhD by doing research on Judicial Education in UK, America, Singapore and Canada. Apart from this, he also has a Diploma in Marketing Management, Advertising and Public Relations. She became a magistrate at the age of just 24 and 11 years later, on her 35th birthday, she reached the post of Sessions Judge.

Also read: Pahalgam terrorist attack: Baisaran valley is deserted even after a year, local traders are yearning to see tourists, read ground report

Has served in various courts for three decades

In her judicial career spanning over three decades, she has served in many courts including the District Courts of Delhi, Family Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Women’s Court, Special Court for Sexual Offenses against Women and Special Court of CBI.

She was appointed as a permanent judge of Delhi High Court on March 28, 2022 and in this role, controversy is raging in the case related to Arvind Kejriwal.

After all, what is the whole controversy?

Actually, this controversy started when Justice Sharma was hearing cases related to the alleged excise policy (liquor sale policy) of Delhi. Initially he worked with Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh and K. Kavita’s bail pleas were rejected, while CBI and ED were investigating the case.

Also read: Petitioner reaches Supreme Court for the third time to declare Netaji as ‘Son of the Nation’, ban on filing PIL in future

Delhi news: The Delhi High Court refused to cancel the FIR lodged in the case of alleged cruelty with a 7 -year -old child. The Delhi High Court said that such crimes against children affect the collective consciousness of the society, and they cannot be erased only by considering it to be a private dispute.

What is the whole matter?
According to the petition filed in the Delhi High Court, the entire case is of June 2023. When a woman alleged that her son was assaulted by her neighbors Amit and his wife and even gave her an electric shock. In this case, an FIR was registered under various sections at Govindpuri police station in Delhi.

In this case, later there was an agreement between the mother of the victim’s child and the accused side. On the main basis, the accused party had filed a petition to cancel the FIR lodged against them in the Delhi High Court. During the hearing of the case in the same Delhi High Court, the victim’s mother told the court that she had entered into this agreement without any pressure and emphasis.

Important order of Delhi High Court
While hearing the case, Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma made it clear in his order that such serious allegations cannot be dismissed only on the basis of mutual agreement.

The High Court said that such acts not only affect the victim but also raise big questions related to the safety and public interest of children in the society. At the same time, the court also said that cancellation of the FIR at this stage will weaken the criminal judicial system and set a serious example.

Delhi High Court accepted child’s statement important
The Delhi High Court also described the statement of the victim child as important in this case, in which it gave full details of the incident. The High Court said that when the child was only 7 years old, such violence and psychological trauma cannot be taken lightly. Even if the item used to jerk out is not the flashlight.

The court said that in view of the seriousness of the allegations, the age of the victim and the need to let the law be allowed to follow the natural path, the demand for cancellation of FIR could not be accepted.