Delhi riots: Judge hearing Tanha’s ‘confession leak’ case hints at recusal

Justice Bhambhani indicated that he has had a past association with the organisation and said, “There are matters where I’ve given specific instructions to the Registry that don’t list these matters before me. It’s about the thing, the phrase that justice should not only be done but it must also be seen to be done… My dilemma is I can’t even say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on this. Even that will have a call on the matter where I have past association.”

Aggarwal urged the court to continue hearing the matter and decide the legal issue of “bias” before deciding to recuse and sought to file a reply in the application. To this the court said, “This is a chicken and egg situation for me. I can’t even decide this application.” The judge said that if the organisation had come before, he would have “recused on day one”. However, without deciding on the recusal today the court renotified the matter listing it on March 15. “Learned proxy counsel appears and says that the counsel leading her in the matter is not available for having suffered a bereavement, list on March 15, 2023, on which date the main matter is listed,” the court said.

In the previous hearing, Aggarwal had asked the court to look at how his client is aggrieved as his “opposing litigant and how the press as the fourth estate” is dealing with him as an accused in custody. He submitted that additionally, the state has an obligation in his case. Aggarwal said, “In law, I’m disabled from reacting to any of this and my opposing litigant is significantly advantaged.”

The Delhi Police had said previously that a vigilance enquiry was conducted wherein journalists were called. As stated in the police’s reply filed in August 2021, various media personnel were examined but they “refused to share the details of their source from where they had accessed the investigation related documents”. The police had argued that even they are aggrieved as there is running commentary happening which is impeding the police’s investigation.

When asked by the court whether information pertaining to the investigation was leaked, police had said that some of the contents were in the public domain. In its reply the police has submitted that as per the vigilance report, “The enquiry officer, during the enquiry could not establish the officers/office from where the details of investigation were shared with the media.” It said that directions are being issued that case files must be handled with “utmost alacrity” and that the chargesheets be also filed “strictly following the due process of law”.

In his 2020 plea, Tanha has alleged that the timing of the “leak” of the purported statement, which is inadmissible in law, to the media and “publication of this false information purportedly from the police files, at a time when bail application of the petitioner is pending consideration before the trial court, creates a reasonable apprehension that the process of justice is being attempted to be subverted”. His bail was then pending before the trial court. Tanha was granted bail by the HC in June 2021.