Delhi High Court Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma to start contempt proceedings against Arvind Kejriwal and AAP leaders over alleged defamatory social media posts in excise case
Arvind Kejriwal (File Photo)
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court on Thursday said she would initiate contempt proceedings against AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal and other senior leaders of his party over allegedly defamatory and contemptuous social media posts targeting her and the court in connection with the excise policy case.
Justice Sharma said their conduct in the excise policy case and others, who allegedly made defamatory and vilifying remarks against her on social media, falls within the definition of criminal contempt of court, adding that she would initiate contempt proceedings against them.
This case has once again brought the spotlight on contempt-related confrontations that have involved politicians, activists, lawyers and public figures over the years.
Among the most widely discussed was author Arundhati Roy’s contempt case in 2002. Roy had criticised the Supreme Court during protests linked to the Narmada dam dispute. The apex court held her guilty of criminal contempt, fined her and sentenced her to symbolic imprisonment. The case became a defining moment in the debate over dissent and criticism of the judiciary.
Another major flashpoint came in 2020 when advocate Prashant Bhushan was found guilty of criminal contempt over tweets critical of the judiciary and the then Chief Justice of India. The Supreme Court imposed a token fine of Re 1. The proceedings triggered nationwide discussions over whether criticism of judges and judicial functioning should attract contempt action.
BJP leader Subramanian Swamy has also figured in multiple contempt-related controversies over the years. Several statements and allegations made by him against judges or courts led to contempt notices and legal scrutiny, although many of those matters were eventually dropped, resolved or not pursued further.
Courts have also examined contempt concerns arising from media commentary surrounding ongoing criminal trials. During proceedings connected to former Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal, debates emerged over whether public remarks and reportage could interfere with judicial proceedings, though the core case itself related to criminal charges.
Apart from individuals, bar associations and groups of lawyers have repeatedly faced contempt warnings over strikes and boycotts. The Supreme Court, in several judgments, has held that lawyer strikes disrupt the justice delivery system and cannot be justified except in rare circumstances.
Late Samajwadi Party leader Amar Singh too was at the centre of contempt-related debates during his tenure as Rajya Sabha MP, with certain remarks made inside and outside Parliament drawing judicial attention, although several issues were resolved procedurally or politically.
Legal experts say contempt law in India continues to remain a sensitive area where courts attempt to balance judicial authority with democratic criticism and freedom of expression. The recurring controversies involving politicians, activists and lawyers have ensured that the debate over the limits of criticism of the judiciary remains alive.
Delhi, India, India
Read More
