AAP supremo Arvind Kejriwal and leaders Manish Sisodia, Saurabh Bharadwaj among others entered appearance before the Delhi High Court on Tuesday (August 4) in a suo motu criminal contempt case initiated for allegedly vilifying Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma through a targeted campaign across social media platforms.
A division bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja noted that Arvind Kejriwal (R1), Manish Sisodia (R2), Durgesh Pathak (R3), Sanjay Singh (R4), Vinay Mishra (R6), and Saurabh Bharadwaj(R7) had been served and had entered appearance.
Meanwhile, Amicus Curiae senior advocate Rajdipa Behura informed the court that Respondent no. 5– AAP leader Devesh Vishwakarma, had not been served.
The court thereafter in its order noted, “Counsel for respondent no. 1-4 and 6,7 enter appearance. Mr Vikram Chaudhari senior counsel appearing for respondent 1 submits that material which has formed the basis of this contempt reference has not been received by him. The same complaint is made by the other respondents as well. The Registry is directed to supply the material (in digital form) which has been collated in terms of our order dated May 19, 2026 to the respondents”.
Noting that Vishwakarma had remained unserved, the court directed that fresh notice be issued to him through the concerned SHO (police). The court said that incase respondent 5 is not available at the given address, the SHO will make inquiry about his current residential address and serve notice to him. It said that the notice must accompany the material relied upon.
While hearing another plea seeking contempt action against Kejriwal, Bharadwaj, AAP leader Gopal Rai and Journalist Saurav Das, the court noted that all the respondents were represented and permitted them to file their replies. Meanwhile the court permitted the petitioner Ashok Chaitanya to file the material he relies upon along with an affidavit within 1 week and supply copies of it to the respondents.
The court has directed that the replies in both contempt pleas be filed in four weeks.
The development ensued when Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma was hearing the CBI’s plea against discharge of all accused in the excise policy case. She later transferred the matter to another bench.
The transfer was done after she initiated contempt proceedings against Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Durgesh Pathak, Sanjay Singh, Devesh Vishwakarma, Vinay Mishra, and Saurabh Bharadwaj.
Contempt action was initiated after Justice Sharma took note of note various social media posts and videos shared by the respondents in connection with the recusal proceedings.
She had earlier rejected the recusal applications filed by Kejriwal and others.
On February 27, the trial court discharged all the 23 accused persons in the case, including political leaders Kejriwal, Sisodia and K Kavitha. The trial court had also severely criticised the CBI’s investigation in the case.
It may be noted that the case had become politically controversial, as Kejriwal was arrested and remanded to the custody amidst the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. He was later granted bail by the Supreme Court after 156 days of custody. AAP leader Manish Sisodia also spent 530 days in custody in the case.
The CBI’s revision against the trial court’s order was heard by Justice Sharma, who on March 9, prima facie observed that the trial court’s observations were erroneous.
Later, Kejriwal and some other accused, including Sisodia, filed applications seeking recusal of Justice Sharma on ground of apprehension of bias. Last week, Justice Sharma, dismissed the recusal applications and decided to hear the matter herself.
Thereafter, Kejriwal and Sisodia wrote to Justice Sharma stating that they are boycotting the hearing before her and will not appear, either in person or through a counsel.
Another contempt plea was filed seeking contempt action against Kejriwal, Bharadwaj as well as AAP leader Gopal Rai and journalist Saurav Das for posting contemptuous content against Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on social media. The court had issued notice to Rai and Das in May.
The plea alleges that during the hearing of recusal application in relation to excise policy case before Justice Sharma, the AAP leaders and the journalist initiated a “concerted and orchestrated campaign” on X (formerly Twitter), published and amplified content containing “serious, unfounded, and scandalous allegations” against her.
The matter is listed on September 21.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. ARVIND KEJRIWAL AND ORS AND
ASHOK CHAITANYA v/s ARVIND KEJRIWAL & ORS.
CONT.CAS.(CRL)-7/2026, CONT.CAS.(CRL)-8/2026
