A complaint has been filed before the Delhi High Court alleging unauthorised recording and circulation of proceedings from an April 13 hearing in which AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal had appeared in person seeking recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in the excise policy case.
The complaint also names AAP leaders and journalist Ravish Kumar for allegedly recording and amplifying the proceedings online.
The High Court has since intervened, directing removal of the clips and examining action over the alleged breach of court rules.
The complaint, filed by advocate Vaibhav Singh, alleges that portions of the proceedings were recorded and widely disseminated across social media platforms shortly after the hearing concluded. It seeks a detailed inquiry and action against those involved, contending that recording of court proceedings violates the Delhi High Court’s video conferencing framework, which bars capturing or publishing hearings without permission.
According to the complaint, multiple political figures and others circulated clips on platforms such as X, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube, amplifying the reach of the videos. The plea claims the dissemination was not incidental but deliberate, aimed at shaping public perception of the judiciary and casting doubts on its independence.
The complainant has further alleged that the manner and speed with which the clips went viral indicates a coordinated effort. It suggests that the recording and circulation of the proceedings were part of a pre-planned exercise intended to influence public sentiment and project the court as functioning under external pressure.
Sources said the High Court has issued directions to the Delhi Police to ensure removal of unauthorised videos from online platforms. Officials underlined that recording of court hearings is prohibited and said action is being initiated against those who uploaded or shared such content.
The developments follow a high-voltage hearing on April 13, where Kejriwal argued for over an hour pressing for Justice Sharma’s recusal from hearing the revision petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Soon after the proceedings, video clips of the exchange surfaced online and quickly gained traction.
After Kejriwal concluded, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed the recusal plea before the court.
The case itself arises from a CBI probe initiated on July 20, 2022, on a complaint by then Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena, alleging irregularities in the now-scrapped excise policy and receipt of kickbacks by AAP leaders. The Enforcement Directorate later registered a parallel money laundering case.
A trial court on February 27 discharged Kejriwal and 22 others, finding no material to proceed. The CBI challenged this order before the High Court, where the matter is pending before Justice Sharma.
On March 9, the High Court issued notice on the CBI’s plea, stayed directions for departmental action against the investigating officer, and recorded preliminary concerns over portions of the trial court’s reasoning.
Subsequently, Kejriwal, along with Manish Sisodia, Durgesh Pathak, Vijay Nair, Arun Pillai and Chanpreet Singh Rayat, moved applications seeking Justice Sharma’s recusal — setting the stage for the courtroom exchange that has now spilled into a separate legal battle over alleged unauthorised recordings.
