Can't intimidate me: Judge hits Kejriwal, AAP leaders with contempt case

The Delhi High Court initiated contempt of court proceedings against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Saurabh Bharadwaj and Durgesh Pathak for their comments on Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. Justice Sharma said the conduct of certain accused in the excise policy case and others, who allegedly made defamatory and vilifying remarks against her on social media, falls within the definition of criminal contempt of court, adding that she would initiate contempt proceedings against them.

"When the institution is put on trial, it becomes the duty of the judge to ensure that the court is not governed by such allegations," said Justice Sharma. She also mentioned that there is a difference between fair criticism and carrying out a campaign against a court.

Justice Sharma is hearing a plea filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation challenging a trial court order that discharged all 23 accused in the excise policy case, including Kejriwal, Sisodia and others.

Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak had earlier sought Justice Sharma’s recusal from the case, but the judge rejected the plea on April 20. In her order, she said politicians cannot be allowed to “sow seeds of mistrust” and observed that the recusal application effectively amounted to putting the judiciary on trial.

"Videos of me speaking at a law college were edited. It should not be presumed that judicial tolerance is the helplessness of the institution itself," said Justice Sharma at the High Court in today's hearing.

She also added, "A person cannot be allowed to threat the judiciary just because judges have no way to respond to social media campaigns."

During the hearing, Sharma reiterated that the court did not expect political retaliation. This institution is not political. "The survival of the judiciary depends not on on its power but on public confidence. Any attempt to destroy that confidence through a coordinated campaign constitutes the gravest instance of contempt."

Her speech at the college was projected as a 'speech from BJP event.'

"A similar video was posted by AAP's Vinay Mishra and when Saurabh Bharadwaj posted the same, it felt very disturbing. In the video, he asked, 'What is the BJP's relationship with Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of Delhi HC?'"

Justice Sharma said that if one defames the court, the court has the weapons to use them. "I have no expectation of applause from you. This court will keep issuing such orders whenever people try to sabotage the system," said Justice Sharma.

Justice Sharma clarifies that her order should not be interpreted as opposing freedom of speech or fair criticism, but stresses the thin line separating it from contempt and vilification of the judiciary.

"Anyone could have heard this case, but only I could have drawn contempt. I decided that action should be taken against people of this kind who run such campaigns against the judiciary," said Justice Sharma.

On February 27, the trial court discharged all 23 accused in the excise policy case, including Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and K. Kavitha, while also sharply criticising the Central Bureau of Investigation’s probe.

The case had sparked major political controversy after Kejriwal was arrested during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections and later granted bail by the Supreme Court after spending 156 days in custody. Sisodia, meanwhile, spent 530 days in jail in connection with the case.

The excise policy matter has been handed to another bench by Justice Sharma to avoid any perception of grudge from the contempt action while reaffirming her rejection of the recusal demand by Kejriwal and others.