The Delhi High Court on Thursday (May 14) referred the excise policy case to the Chief Justice for transfer to another Bench after Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma initiated criminal contempt proceedings against former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and several Aam Aadmi Party leaders over alleged attempts to target the judiciary through social media campaigns, public statements and edited videos.&nbsp;The Court clarified that it was not reversing its earlier order rejecting Kejriwal’s plea seeking Justice Sharma’s recusal from hearing the matter. However, it observed that judicial propriety required the excise policy case to be heard by another Bench now that contempt proceedings concerning allegations against the judge and the Court had been initiated.&nbsp;“The recusal issue stands concluded,” the Court observed, adding that the present proceedings related to “subsequent acts allegedly amounting to criminal contempt”.&nbsp;Justice Sharma initiated contempt proceedings against Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh, MLA Vinay Mishra and senior AAP leader Saurabh Bharadwaj, among others.&nbsp;In a detailed order dictated in open court, Justice Sharma said the alleged statements, videos and online campaigns amounted to a “calculated campaign” aimed at scandalising the judiciary and lowering public confidence in the Court.&nbsp;According to the Court, several public remarks attempted to portray the judge as politically aligned and questioned the Court’s impartiality in matters involving AAP leaders.<h2>‘I refuse to be intimidated’: Justice Sharma</h2>During the hearing, Justice Sharma made strong observations on attempts to influence judicial proceedings through public pressure and social media campaigns.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-claims-xi-offered-help-to-open-hormuz-vowed-china-won-t-arm-iran-1778772642135">Trump claims Xi offered help to open Hormuz, vowed China won’t arm Iran</a> “They wanted to intimidate me. Mujhe darana chahte the. I refuse to be intimidated,” the judge remarked in open court.&nbsp;The Court warned that if such conduct became normalised, judges could begin deciding matters based on anticipated political backlash rather than legal principles, adding that “justice itself may become a casualty.”&nbsp;Justice Sharma also referred to statements allegedly made by AAP leaders questioning her ideological neutrality, including remarks linking her to the BJP and RSS.&nbsp;Referring to one such comment allegedly made by Saurabh Bharadwaj, the Court observed that attempts to publicly question a judge’s independence crossed the boundary between criticism and criminal contempt.&nbsp;The Court further noted that some edited videos and online material allegedly distorted references made during a public speech related to Lord Shiva and the spiritual significance of Kashi in order to create a misleading political narrative.&nbsp;Justice Sharma also indicated that separate proceedings could be initiated against certain YouTubers and online platforms accused of amplifying “contemptuous” content targeting the judiciary.&nbsp;“We are in the process of collating materials,” the Court said.

Justice Sharma initiated contempt proceedings against Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh, MLA Vinay Mishra and senior AAP leader Saurabh Bharadwaj, among others.

The Delhi High Court on Thursday (May 14) referred the excise policy case to the Chief Justice for transfer to another Bench after Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma initiated criminal contempt proceedings against former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and several Aam Aadmi Party leaders over alleged attempts to target the judiciary through social media campaigns, public statements and edited videos. The Court clarified that it was not reversing its earlier order rejecting Kejriwal’s plea seeking Justice Sharma’s recusal from hearing the matter. However, it observed that judicial propriety required the excise policy case to be heard by another Bench now that contempt proceedings concerning allegations against the judge and the Court had been initiated. “The recusal issue stands concluded,” the Court observed, adding that the present proceedings related to “subsequent acts allegedly amounting to criminal contempt”. Justice Sharma initiated contempt proceedings against Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh, MLA Vinay Mishra and senior AAP leader Saurabh Bharadwaj, among others. In a detailed order dictated in open court, Justice Sharma said the alleged statements, videos and online campaigns amounted to a “calculated campaign” aimed at scandalising the judiciary and lowering public confidence in the Court. According to the Court, several public remarks attempted to portray the judge as politically aligned and questioned the Court’s impartiality in matters involving AAP leaders. ‘I refuse to be intimidated’: Justice Sharma During the hearing, Justice Sharma made strong observations on attempts to influence judicial proceedings through public pressure and social media campaigns. Also Read: Trump claims Xi offered help to open Hormuz, vowed China won’t arm Iran “They wanted to intimidate me. Mujhe darana chahte the. I refuse to be intimidated,” the judge remarked in open court. The Court warned that if such conduct became normalised, judges could begin deciding matters based on anticipated political backlash rather than legal principles, adding that “justice itself may become a casualty.” Justice Sharma also referred to statements allegedly made by AAP leaders questioning her ideological neutrality, including remarks linking her to the BJP and RSS. Referring to one such comment allegedly made by Saurabh Bharadwaj, the Court observed that attempts to publicly question a judge’s independence crossed the boundary between criticism and criminal contempt. The Court further noted that some edited videos and online material allegedly distorted references made during a public speech related to Lord Shiva and the spiritual significance of Kashi in order to create a misleading political narrative. Justice Sharma also indicated that separate proceedings could be initiated against certain YouTubers and online platforms accused of amplifying “contemptuous” content targeting the judiciary. “We are in the process of collating materials,” the Court said.

Justice Sharma initiated contempt proceedings against Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh, MLA Vinay Mishra and senior AAP leader Saurabh Bharadwaj, among others.

‘I refuse to be intimidated’: Delhi judge steps aside from excise policy case, initiates contempt action against Kejriwal

While hearing the liquor policy matter in the Delhi High Court, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Monday said former chief minister Arvind Kejriwal that he had "argued well and can practice as a lawyer". However, Kejriwal replied that he was happy with his present calling. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma praised Arvind Kejriwal for his arguments, and remarked, "You argued well. Aap vakeel ban sakte hai." Sharma's remark came after Kejriwal wrapped up his hour-long submissions seeking her recusal from hearing the Central Bureau of Investigation plea. The petition challenges a trial court order that had discharged him and other accused in the liquor policy case. Kejriwal, a former IRS officer, responded that he was content with his current role. Meanwhile, senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, representing Manish Sisodia, humorously urged him “not to add to the competition.” The hearing, which began at 2:30 PM, continued for nearly four and a half hours before the court reserved its verdict on the recusal issue.&nbsp;Kejriwal had raised multiple objections to the judge hearing the case, citing her earlier decisions denying him relief in his arrest challenge, rejecting bail pleas of other accused such as Sisodia and K. Kavitha, and making what he described as strong and conclusive observations. "I was almost declared guilty. I was almost declared corrupt. Kewal saza sunani baaki reh gayi thi (Only the sentence was left to be pronounced)," he said.<h3>ED Case</h3>In a previous instance, while making submissions in a court proceeding, Kejriwal directly addressed the trial judge on March 28, 2024, when the trial court extended his custody with ED in the related case. He also questioned whether there was sufficient evidence to arrest a sitting chief minister.&nbsp;He was allowed by the trial judge to present oral arguments even though he was already represented by a senior counsel. On February 27, the trial court discharged Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and 21 others, while strongly criticising the Central Bureau of Investigation, stating that its case could not withstand judicial scrutiny and was entirely discredited.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-backs-right-to-vote-in-the-country-where-you-are-born-says-it-s-a-sentimental-right-1776144956819">Supreme Court backs 'right to vote in the country where you are born,' says it's a 'sentimental' right</a>

Arvind Kejriwal had raised multiple objections to the judge hearing the case, citing her earlier decisions denying him relief in his arrest challenge, rejecting bail pleas of other accused such as Sisodia and K. Kavitha, and making what he described as strong and conclusive observations.

While hearing the liquor policy matter in the Delhi High Court, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Monday said former chief minister Arvind Kejriwal that he had "argued well and can practice as a lawyer". However, Kejriwal replied that he was happy with his present calling. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma praised Arvind Kejriwal for his arguments, and remarked, "You argued well. Aap vakeel ban sakte hai." Sharma's remark came after Kejriwal wrapped up his hour-long submissions seeking her recusal from hearing the Central Bureau of Investigation plea. The petition challenges a trial court order that had discharged him and other accused in the liquor policy case. Kejriwal, a former IRS officer, responded that he was content with his current role. Meanwhile, senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, representing Manish Sisodia, humorously urged him “not to add to the competition.” The hearing, which began at 2:30 PM, continued for nearly four and a half hours before the court reserved its verdict on the recusal issue. Kejriwal had raised multiple objections to the judge hearing the case, citing her earlier decisions denying him relief in his arrest challenge, rejecting bail pleas of other accused such as Sisodia and K. Kavitha, and making what he described as strong and conclusive observations. "I was almost declared guilty. I was almost declared corrupt. Kewal saza sunani baaki reh gayi thi (Only the sentence was left to be pronounced)," he said. ED Case In a previous instance, while making submissions in a court proceeding, Kejriwal directly addressed the trial judge on March 28, 2024, when the trial court extended his custody with ED in the related case. He also questioned whether there was sufficient evidence to arrest a sitting chief minister. He was allowed by the trial judge to present oral arguments even though he was already represented by a senior counsel. On February 27, the trial court discharged Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and 21 others, while strongly criticising the Central Bureau of Investigation, stating that its case could not withstand judicial scrutiny and was entirely discredited. Also read: Supreme Court backs 'right to vote in the country where you are born,' says it's a 'sentimental' right

Arvind Kejriwal had raised multiple objections to the judge hearing the case, citing her earlier decisions denying him relief in his arrest challenge, rejecting bail pleas of other accused such as Sisodia and K. Kavitha, and making what he described as strong and conclusive observations.

'You argued well, can be a lawyer': HC Judge to Arvind Kejriwal during liquor case hearings

kejriwal-liquor-policy-case

Kejriwal Liquor Policy Case, News on Kejriwal Liquor Policy Case, stories on Kejriwal Liquor Policy Case, articles on Kejriwal Liquor Policy Case, Kejriwal Liquor Policy Case stories at Wion, Kejriwal Liquor Policy Case news, Kejriwal Liquor Policy Case latest news

kejriwal liquor-policy-case

‘I refuse to be intimidated’: Delhi judge steps aside from excise policy case, initiates contempt action against Kejriwal

'You argued well, can be a lawyer': HC Judge to Arvind Kejriwal