Criminal contempt proceedings in Delhi High Court over AAP social media posts on excise policy case

Delhi High Court judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma initiated criminal contempt proceedings against AAP leaders, including Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia, over social media posts she said vilified the court in the excise policy case. She stated the posts prima facie scandalised the court and interfered with justice, and said the CBI petition would be heard by another bench.

Delhi High Court judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Thursday began criminal contempt proceedings against AAP leaders. The action followed social media posts linked to the excise policy case. The proposed contemnors included Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, and Saurabh Bhardwaj. Justice Sharma also named Durgesh Pathak, Vinay Mishra, and an X user.

In a court pronouncement late this evening that lasted over an hour, Justice Sharma outlined the basis. "This court is satisfied that the acts of the proposed contemnors prima facie constitute criminal contempt within the meaning of Contempt of Court Act, 1971, as they were calculated to scandalise the court, lower the authority of the institution of justice, interfere with the administration of justice and intimidate the independent exercise of judicial function, Justice Sharma said.\"

Delhi High Court contempt proceedings in excise policy case

Justice Sharma objected to posts that linked political allegiance to the judge. The order also referred to an allegedly misleading edited video. The clip related to a speech Justice Sharma gave at an educational institution in Varanasi. Justice Sharma also flagged the wide sharing of clips from court hearings online.

Justice Sharma said the online activity was building a separate account of the case. Justice Sharma said staying quiet would not show restraint. Justice Sharma said it would mean yielding to a powerful litigant. Justice Sharma also said AAP leaders crossed a line by involving Justice Sharma’s children, who were not linked to the case.

Justice Sharma also addressed letters by Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak. The letters said they would boycott proceedings before Justice Sharma. These letters appeared after Justice Sharma rejected their request for recusal. Justice Sharma said the letters were also posted on social media. Justice Sharma called that conduct contemptuous in nature.

Delhi High Court order on recusal and bench change

Justice Sharma said Kejriwal chose public attacks over legal steps. \"Arvind Kejriwal orchestrated a calculated campaign of vilification and intimidation. Instead of challenging the order of recusal in accordance with law before the Supreme Court, he sought to destroy the reputation of a sitting judge i.e. me and the institution, Justice Sharma said.\"

Justice Sharma said the material went beyond criticism of an order. \"The utterances by the proposed contemnors in the form of videos and letters did not merely express disagreement with a judicial order, rather they lead to one conclusion that it was a calculated campaign of vilification in the digital space directed against not only this court as an individual sitting judge but against the entire institution of the judiciary, she added.\"

Justice Sharma said courts can face criticism in a democracy. Justice Sharma said free speech cannot cover deliberate attempts to lower a court’s authority. Justice Sharma clarified that Justice Sharma was not recusing from the case. Justice Sharma said the case would shift because contempt proceedings were now pending.

Justice Sharma said Kejriwal and others could later claim bias or personal hostility. Justice Sharma said the earlier order refusing recusal still stood. Justice Sharma said later developments formed a separate issue for the court. \"I will list this before the Chief Justice so that this case can be heard by another bench, she ordered.\"

Delhi High Court hearing includes CBI and Solicitor General remarks

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the CBI. Mehta thanked Justice Sharma for protecting the institution’s dignity. Mehta also urged Justice Sharma to continue hearing the matter. Mehta said the judge’s children were among 600-700 central government panel lawyers. Mehta said they were not associated with him.

Mehta also criticised Kejriwal’s conduct at Rajghat. Mehta remarked, \"This is the first time any political person has stooped this low.\" Mehta also said an SOP should be prepared for dealing with such litigants. The court record noted these submissions during the hearing.

Earlier in the day, Justice Sharma said Justice Sharma could not remain silent. Justice Sharma said contempt action would follow against some discharged accused. Justice Sharma referred to material described as vilifying and defamatory. The material was posted online and targeted the judge during the ongoing dispute.

The case history included a February 27 trial court order. The trial court discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others in the liquor policy case. The trial court said the case could not survive judicial scrutiny. It said the matter stood discredited in its entirety, according to the order.

Justice Sharma had dismissed their recusal pleas on April 20. After that, Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak wrote to Justice Sharma. The letter said they would not appear, in person or through a lawyer. The letter also said they would follow Mahatma Gandhis path of Satyagraha.

Justice Sharma said the CBI’s petition against the discharge would now go before another bench. Justice Sharma linked that shift to the contempt proceedings started on Thursday. The court said the contempt issue must be handled independently. The court also recorded concerns about online posts and edited content related to the judge.

With inputs from PTI