AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal has filed an additional affidavit before the Delhi High Court, placing on record details of case allocations to the son of Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma under the Central Government’s panel system, and reiterating his request that the judge recuse herself from hearing the excise policy case.The development comes two days after a prolonged and tense hearing on Monday, where Kejriwal, appearing in person, has sought the recusal of Justice Sharma from hearing the CBI’s challenge to the trial court order that discharged him and other accused in the excise policy case.Kejriwal had argued that his plea is based on a reasonable apprehension regarding the appearance of neutrality in the proceedings.In his fresh affidavit, Kejriwal has referred to what he termed “subsequently discovered facts”, submitting that these materially strengthen his earlier recusal application. He has relied on official records, government notifications and publicly available material to state that members of the judge’s immediate family, including her son, are empanelled as counsel for the Central Government and receive case assignments through the same institutional framework overseen by law officers such as Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.The affidavit said that such empanelments are not merely honorary but involve continuing professional engagements with the government, including allocation of briefs, appearances in court and financial benefit. It refers to the procedure of allocation of cases, noting that matters are marked by the Solicitor General to panel counsel and other law officers.Quoting from the affidavit, Kejriwal has said: “A total of 2,487 cases were marked to the son of the Hon’ble Justice in the year 2023, 1,784 cases in 2024 and 1,633 cases in 2025.”On this basis, the affidavit submitted that the professional relationship with the Central Government is “live, continuing and substantial”, and that these circumstances give rise to a “direct and serious appearance of conflict of interest”.Kejriwal has clarified that he is not alleging actual bias, but has argued that the applicable legal standard is whether a fair-minded litigant could reasonably apprehend that justice may not appear to be done.He has also placed the matter in the context of the present proceedings, noting that the prosecution is being conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), with senior law officers for the Union appearing in the case, while he remains a political opponent of the ruling establishment at the Centre.The affidavit further raises issues regarding the conduct of Monday’s hearing. Kejriwal has said that after he concluded his submissions and left court, the proceedings continued beyond normal court hours and were concluded the same day without granting him an opportunity to respond to the prosecution’s arguments.He has also submitted that while the recusal application was still under consideration, the court proceeded to pass directions in the main matter, which, according to him, added to his apprehension regarding the continuation of the case before the same Bench.“I respectfully submit that the continuation of the present proceedings would give rise to an immediate and direct appearance of conflict of interest,” the affidavit states, adding that the matter should not be heard further by the present Bench in the interest of justice.