New Delhi, May 15 -- Delhi high court judge, justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, on Thursday initiated contempt proceedings against former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and other Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders but withdrew from hearing both the contempt case as well as the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI's) appeal against a trial court order discharging Kejriwal and others in the Delhi excise policy case. Justice Sharma said that the law did not permit a judge who has initiated contempt proceedings - in this case against Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Durgesh Pathak, Sanjay Singh and Saurabh Bharadwaj over allegedly defamatory, contemptuous and vilifying material posted against the judge on social media - in relation to a matter to continue hearing that very matter. But she clarified that her earlier April 20 order - refusing to recuse from the excise policy case - stands. "In law, the judge who draws contempt proceedings cannot hear the main case. Recusal stands as it is. So on this note, I will list this matter (CBI's appeal) before the chief justice so that the case can be heard by another bench and contempt proceedings can also be heard," the justice said in her verdict, dictated for almost 30 minutes. Kejriwal claimed victory. "Truth has triumphed. Mahatma Gandhi's Satyagraha has triumphed once again," he said. The Bharatiya Janata Party said Kejriwal and the AAP crossed a dangerous line. The unprecedented face-off began on February 27, when a trial court discharged Kejriwal and others in the excise policy case, prompting CBI to approach the high court. On March 9, justice Sharma stayed the trial court's direction for departmental action against a CBI officer and deferred Enforcement Directorate proceedings. However, Kejriwal then sought to transfer the matter from her bench, which was rejected by chief justice DK Upadhyaya on March 13. On April 5, Kejriwal, Sisodia and others sought justice Sharma's recusal, which she dismissed on April 20. On April 27, Kejriwal informed the judge that he would boycott the proceedings. Following this, Sisodia and Pathak also wrote similar letters. On May 5, the court decided to appoint senior advocates as amicus curiae to represent the three leaders, but the matter was deferred on three occasions. However, on Thursday, the judge proceeded to initiate contempt proceedings. In her verdict, justice Sharma said that if CBI's appeal against the February 27 discharge order were allowed to continue before her despite the initiation of contempt, the contemnors could later contend that she proceeded while harbouring personal grievance or bias against them. "This court has already rejected the application seeking recusal by detailed judicial order and made its position clear and stands by it without even a slightest alteration."...