The Delhi High Court on Thursday initiated criminal contempt proceedings against AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Vinay Mishra, Durgesh Pathak and Saurabh Bharadwaj in connection with the excise policy case.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said the leaders had circulated defamatory, contemptuous and vilifying material against the court through social media posts, videos and public statements linked to the recusal proceedings in the case, as reported by Live Law.
The matter arose after some of the accused sought Justice Sharma’s recusal from hearing the CBI’s petition challenging the discharge of accused persons in the alleged liquor policy corruption case. The court rejected those applications and decided to continue hearing the matter.
While hearing the case on Thursday, Justice Sharma said the court had noticed what it described as a coordinated social media campaign after the recusal plea was dismissed.
Court cites ‘campaign of vilification’
In a strongly worded order, Justice Sharma was quoted as saying by Live Law, “Contemnor Arvind Kejriwal orchestrated a campaign of vilification. Instead of challenging order before SC but he dragged the order to social media.”
The court also referred to selectively edited videos and letters circulated online, alleging they were aimed at damaging the credibility of the judiciary.
“When video of judge is selectively edited, it shows malice. He wanted to ridicule me. The message conveyed by the campaign by contemnors and specially Mr. Kejriwal was that if a judge doesnt conform to expectations of political force, judge will be vilified. If such conduct is unchecked and judges are threatened, justice will become a casualty,” the court observed, per Live Law.
Justice Sharma further stated, “They wanted to intimidate me...I REFUSE TO BE INTIMIDATED.”
The judge clarified that fair criticism of judicial orders is permissible but said the actions of the accused crossed that line. The court said Kejriwal’s statements and social media activity amounted to “scandalising the court in the eyes of public and lowering its integrity.”
Remarks on videos, press conferences and social media posts
The court also examined statements and posts allegedly shared by other AAP leaders. Referring to Sanjay Singh, the court said he reposted Kejriwal’s video and questioned the court’s impartiality by linking the judge to a political ideology.
Justice Sharma also referred to a video clip from a lecture delivered in Varanasi, which the court said had been selectively edited and falsely projected as a political speech.
“The post was published and it has 1 Lakh views and 3,000 reposts. The video pertains to a lecture in Varanasi university during a workshop. Video shared by the user Mr. Vishwakarna was selectively cropped,” the court noted.
On Saurabh Bharadwaj’s press conference, the court cited his remark — “BJP ka High Court judge se kya rishta hain” — and said publicly questioning the integrity of a sitting judge amounted to contempt.
Court says action aimed at protecting institution
Justice Sharma stressed that the contempt proceedings were not initiated out of personal anger but to protect the institution of the judiciary.
Also Read | Delhi court denies bail to Al-Falah University chief in ₹415 crore money laundering case
“It would have been better had I stayed quiet, but that would have meant that I would not have tried to save the institution (Ye behtar hota ki mai chup rehti but uska mtlb hota ki is institution ko mai nahi bachaati),” the judge said.
The court added that “videos and letters” circulated online were part of a “calculated campaign” targeting not just a sitting judge but the judiciary itself.
The excise policy case has remained politically sensitive since the arrest of Kejriwal and Sisodia during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Earlier this year, a trial court discharged all 23 accused in the case, after which the CBI challenged the order before the Delhi High Court.
