Delhi HC Seeks Response From Kejriwal, Sisodia In Criminal Contempt Case Over Remarks Against Justice Sharma

Delhi High Court issues notices to Arvind Kejriwal, Sanjay Singh, Manish Sisodia, and Vinay Mishra in a contempt case.

Delhi High Court has issued notice to AAP leaders including Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia seeking their stand in the criminal contempt case.

Source : ANI

Show Quick Read

Key points generated by AI, verified by newsroom

• Delhi High Court issues notice in criminal contempt case.
• AAP leaders summoned over social media posts against judge.
• Justice Sharma initiated proceedings over alleged vilifying posts.
• Court seeks AAP leaders' stand, lists for August 4.

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday issued notices to several Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders, including Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Saurabh Bhardwaj and Durgesh Pathak in a criminal contempt case initiated over alleged social media posts against Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.

A bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja sought their stand in the matter and granted four weeks to file replies.

"Issue notice. The alleged contemnors will file their response within a period of four weeks from the receipt of notice," the bench said while listing the matter for further hearing on August 4.

Along with this, the court has directed the registry to preserve all records related to social media and keep them on the court's record. The court also said that an amicus curiae will be appointed in the case. None of the accused, including Kejriwal, appeared in court today.

Justice Sharma Initiated Suo Motu Proceedings

The contempt proceedings were initiated suo motu by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on May 14 in relation to alleged “vilifying” posts shared by the AAP leaders on social media concerning the excise policy case.

Justice Sharma had observed that Kejriwal, the former Delhi chief minister, allegedly "orchestrated a calculated campaign" against her through social media instead of pursuing available legal remedies.

The judge also clarified that the Central Bureau of Investigation’s plea challenging the discharge of all accused persons in the liquor policy case would now be heard by another bench.

Court Flags ‘Parallel Narrative’

Justice Sharma took exception to several posts that allegedly suggested “political allegiance” and “affiliation” on her part.

The court also referred to the circulation of an allegedly edited video clip from a speech delivered by the judge at an educational institution in Varanasi.

According to the order, clips from court proceedings were widely circulated online to create what the court termed a “parallel narrative”.

The judge further remarked that "remaining silent" in such circumstances would not amount to judicial restraint but rather a "surrender before a powerful litigant."

Background Of The Excise Policy Case

On February 27, a trial court had discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and 21 others in the excise policy case, observing that the prosecution’s case failed to withstand judicial scrutiny.

Subsequently, on April 20, Justice Sharma dismissed applications filed by Kejriwal and others seeking her recusal from hearing the CBI’s petition challenging the discharge order.

Following the rejection of the recusal pleas, Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak had written to Justice Sharma stating that they would neither appear before her personally nor through legal counsel and would instead follow "Mahatma Gandhi's path of Satyagraha".