AAP chief and former CM Arvind Kejriwal told Delhi High Court judge Swarana Kanta Sharma that her previous decisions in the liquor policy cases had almost declared him guilty and corrupt.
Appearing before Justice Sharma to argue his application, he expressed that he apprehends he would not get justice if she continues to hear CBI's plea against his discharge.
Seeking her to withdraw from the case, the AAP leader contended that under the law on recusal, the question is not of a judge's integrity or uprightness, but of "reasonable bias" in the mind of the litigant.
Kejriwal claimed that, except for the CBI's petition and one other case involving a political opponent of the BJP, no other case before Justice Sharma was being heard at the same "speed" and there was a "trend" of the court "endorsing" the investigating agencies' arguments.
He submitted that on the first day of the hearing on March 9, the court "neutralised" the discharge order, which was passed by the trial judge after day-to-day arguments of over three months, by passing a "sweeping, ex parte order" in haste in violation of principles of natural justice.
On February 27, the trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others and pulled up the CBI, saying its case was wholly unable to survive judicial scrutiny and stood discredited in its entirety.
On March 9, Justice Sharma issued notice to all 23 accused on CBI's plea against their discharge, saying certain observations and findings of the trial court at the stage of framing of charges prima facie appeared erroneous and needed consideration.
She also stayed the trial court's recommendation on the initiation of departmental action against the CBI's investigating officer in the liquor policy case.
"I was shocked, and I had some apprehension about whether the court is biased and whether I will get justice. What was the urgency for this? What was the need for this?" Kejriwal said during the hearing.
He objected to the stay on departmental action against the CBI official as well as the deferment of proceedings on the ED case.
"This was a CBI petition. The ED has nothing to do with it. The ED is not even a party. There was no written prayer. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta only made an oral demand," he said.
Kejriwal said that Justice Sharma had earlier denied relief to him on his petition challenging his arrest, as well as bail pleas by other accused, including Manish Sisodia and K Kavitha, and also made "strong and conclusive" findings.
"I was almost declared guilty. I was almost declared corrupt. Kewal saza sunani baaki reh gayi thi (Only sentence was left to be pronounced)," he said.
"The court almost said (in Manish Sisodia's bail order) that all these guys are corrupt. They are 'maha corrupt'. Only three hearings and a conclusion was drawn that Manish was a very corrupt man," Kejriwal stated.
He emphasised that in the discharge order, the trial court has given findings that are in "stark contrast" to what the high court has earlier ruled on several critical issues, including admissibility of approver statements, and questioned if Justice Sharma would be able to change her view.
He also objected to Justice Sharma attending four functions organised by the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad.
He contended that being an ideological opponent of the BJP and RSS, he apprehended that the judge "sympathised" with their ideology and that he would not receive justice.
As Justice Sharma asked Kejriwal if she had made any ideological or political statements in the events, the AAP chief said her attendance was enough.
Kejriwal also highlighted that Home Minister Amit Shah has said in a programme that the AAP chief would have to approach the Supreme Court against the high court's decision.
"What control do I have over what he says?" the judge said.
Kejriwal also alleged that Justice Sharma has a conflict of interest in the case.
He concluded arguments on his recusal application.
With inputs from PTI