Delhi HC orders takedown of unauthorised Kejriwal court hearing clips
text_fields
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on April 15 directed the police to ensure the removal of all unauthorised videos circulating on social media that depict Arvind Kejriwal arguing before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. The videos relate to proceedings in Kejriwal’s plea seeking the judge’s recusal from the Delhi Excise Policy case.
The directive comes amid controversy over the unauthorised recording and sharing of court proceedings. Registry officials indicated that action is being initiated against individuals responsible for recording and uploading the videos in violation of established video conferencing norms. They noted that similar action has been taken in previous instances involving the publication of court proceedings online.
Earlier in the day, advocate Vaibhav Singh filed a complaint before the High Court, alleging that audio and video recordings from the April 13 hearing before Justice Sharma were unlawfully recorded and widely circulated. Addressing the Registrar General, Singh claimed that several political leaders, including Kejriwal and other members of the Aam Aadmi Party, had “intentionally and deliberately” recorded and shared the proceedings across social media platforms in breach of rules.
The complaint argued that such actions violated the Delhi High Court Rules for Video Conferencing, 2021, as well as the Electronic Evidence and Video Conferencing Rules, 2025, both of which explicitly prohibit unauthorised recording or publication of court proceedings. It further alleged that the clips, circulated on platforms such as X, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube, formed part of a “pre-planned conspiracy” aimed at maligning the judiciary and misleading the public.
Singh urged the court to initiate a detailed inquiry and take appropriate action against all individuals and political entities allegedly involved in the violation.
The April 13 hearing concerned Kejriwal’s plea requesting the recusal of Justice Sharma from matters connected to the alleged Delhi Excise Policy case. Appearing in person, Kejriwal argued his application for nearly 45 minutes, asserting that he is “no longer an accused” as a trial court had discharged him and others after finding no grounds to frame charges.
He contended that Justice Sharma’s subsequent ex parte order, which partially stayed the trial court’s findings, created a “grave and reasonable apprehension” regarding the fairness of the proceedings. Kejriwal told the court that the order caused him serious concern about receiving justice and revealed that he had written to Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, the master of the roster, seeking a transfer of the case before filing the recusal plea.
He emphasised that the principle governing recusal rests on a litigant’s reasonable apprehension of bias rather than the actual existence of bias.
Responding to these submissions, Justice Sharma observed that concerns regarding the manner or urgency of judicial orders cannot be adjudicated within recusal proceedings and should instead be challenged before the Supreme Court.
Opposing the plea, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that the legal threshold for recusal is well established and cautioned against allegations that could undermine the dignity of the judicial process. “Whether we win or lose, we must remain fair to the court,” he remarked.
After hearing all parties, the Delhi High Court reserved its verdict on the recusal plea and directed the submission of brief written arguments within the stipulated timeframe.
With IANS inputs