AAP in Crisis: Leadership Boycotts Court as Massive Defections and Corruption Probes Signal “Terminal Phase”

AAP in Crisis: Leadership Boycotts Court as Massive Defections and Corruption Probes Signal “Terminal Phase”

Justice Sharma has refused to recuse herself, stating that her oath is to the Constitution and that “justice does not bend under pressure”.

By Rakesh Raman
New Delhi | April 28, 2026

In a dramatic escalation of the legal battle surrounding the Delhi excise policy, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia has joined Arvind Kejriwal in a total boycott of judicial proceedings before Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma.

In a letter dated April 28, 2026, Sisodia informed the Delhi High Court that he and his lawyers would no longer appear, citing a complete “loss of faith” and a choice to resort to “satyagraha”. This move follows a similar declaration by Kejriwal, who alleged a conflict of interest because the judge’s children, serving as panel lawyers for the central government, have professional links to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta—the lead counsel appearing against the AAP leaders.

Justice Sharma has refused to recuse herself, stating that her oath is to the Constitution and that “justice does not bend under pressure”. She characterized the demand for her recusal as an attempt to “sow seeds of mistrust” and noted that stepping aside without valid grounds would be an “abdication of duty”. Legal experts warn that this non-appearance could lead to coercive steps, including warrants, against the AAP leadership.

The “Great Exodus”: Two-Thirds of Rajya Sabha Wing Joins BJP

This judicial standoff comes just days after the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) suffered a catastrophic political blow. On April 24, 2026, seven out of the party’s ten Rajya Sabha members defected to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Led by Raghav Chadha, the defectors include Sandeep Pathak, Ashok Mittal, former cricketer Harbhajan Singh, Swati Maliwal, Rajendra Gupta, and Vikram Sahney.

By defecting as a two-thirds faction, these members invoked constitutional merger protections, allowing them to retain their seats while shifting the balance of power in the Upper House in favor of the ruling BJP. Raghav Chadha publicly justified the move by claiming the AAP leadership had abandoned its founding morals for “personal benefits”. However, internal reports suggest a “syndicate schism,” alleging that the defections were a survival tactic to seek a “haven” from central investigative agencies and internal party retribution.

Also Read:

[ Investigating the AAP Corruption Model and Systematic Financial Misconduct Allegations ]

[ क्या है आम आदमी पार्टी और अरविंद केजरीवाल के भ्रष्टाचार का मॉडल? ]

Forensic Audits and the “16-Step Corruption Model”

The party’s political collapse is mirrored by a series of devastating forensic audits. Investigators have identified what they call a “16-step AAP corruption model“ used to siphon funds through state machinery. Key allegations include:

• Delhi Liquor Scandal: A Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) audit confirmed a ₹2,027 crore revenue loss due to “felonious decisions” that arbitrarily increased wholesaler profit margins to facilitate kickbacks.
• Hospital Scandal: Forensic audits revealed ₹5,590 crore in fiscal irregularities related to the construction of 24 hospitals.
• “Sheeshmahal” Misappropriation: Investigations allege ₹45 crore in state funds were used for the luxury renovation of Arvind Kejriwal’s residence during a public health crisis.
• Evidence Tampering: The CBI highlighted a “digital blackout” where over 30 individuals allegedly destroyed 140 mobile phones to erase traces of crime proceeds.

Legal Innovation: AAP Classified as a “Company”

In an unprecedented legal shift, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has invoked Section 70 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) to classify the Aam Aadmi Party as a “company”. This establishes “vicarious liability,” asserting the party organization was the primary beneficiary of funds used in election campaigns in Goa and Punjab.

This classification allows the ED to subject the party’s internal accounts to the same scrutiny as a commercial firm, bypassing traditional political immunity. As the CBI challenges the February 2026 acquittal of Kejriwal and Sisodia—calling the trial court’s previous discharge order “patently illegal”—the AAP now faces a “terminal state” of systemic freefall, with its leadership, legislative strength, and legal standing all under immediate threat.

Beyond these specific cases, recent investigative discourse and research reports—such as the India Judicial Research Report 2025 and the India Corruption Research Report 2025—have raised provocative systemic critiques regarding a “vicious cycle” of institutional decay. These reports describe a “bribe for bail” culture facilitated by “criminal intermediaries” who leverage political affiliations to influence judicial outcomes.

By Rakesh Raman, who is a national award-winning journalist and social activist. He is the founder of the humanitarian organization RMN Foundation which is working in diverse areas to help the disadvantaged and distressed people in the society.