A fresh development unfolded in the Delhi High Court on Tuesday during the ongoing proceedings of a criminal contempt petition filed against several prominent leaders of the Aam Aadmi Party and a journalist. The matter stems from controversial remarks and allegations of a conflict of interest leveled against Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on social media platforms. During the latest hearing, the petitioner informed the bench that the disputed posts have now been taken down from social media, although the digital records and evidence of those posts remain safely preserved with the petitioner.
Roots of the Controversy and Social Media Outcry
The entire controversy dates back to April 9, when journalist Saurabh Das published a social media post. At that time, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma was presiding over a Delhi High Court hearing concerning a Central Bureau of Investigation plea challenging the legal relief granted to Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and other political figures in the Delhi excise policy case. In his post, the journalist alleged that the judge's son and daughter serve as panel counsels for the central government in the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court, thereby constituting a conflict of interest in the adjudication of the matter. Following this post, several leaders from the Aam Aadmi Party also shared their reactions and amplified the narrative.
Submissions Before the Bench
The proceedings took place before a division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja. During the hearing, advocate Ashok Chaitanya, appearing as the petitioner, placed the updated facts before the court. He formally informed the bench that the objectionable posts originally published by journalist Saurabh Das as well as senior Aam Aadmi Party leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Saurabh Bharadwaj, and Gopal Rai have now been deleted. However, he made it clear that despite the removal of these posts, digital evidence and records backing the contempt petition remain securely archived and intact for the court's perusal.
