Plea Filed Over ‘Illegal Recording’ Of Delhi High Court Proceedings In Kejriwal Recusal Hearing, Names AAP Leaders

The petitioner has sought action against leaders of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), members of other political parties and Journalist Ravish Kumar for allegedly recording and circulating video and audio excerpts of the court hearing on multiple social media platforms. 

The petition specifically refers to the proceedings before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, where Kejriwal had appeared in person and argued his application seeking recusal of the judge from hearing appeals filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the liquor policy case. The court had permitted Kejriwal to argue in person, and the hearing reportedly lasted around 45–50 minutes. Notably, the bench on April 13 had reserved the order in the plea.

According to the petitioner, the court proceedings were recorded and subsequently circulated widely on platforms including X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and news channels. He alleges that several political leaders, including those from AAP and other opposition parties, shared and reposted the clips with commentary, thereby violating statutory rules governing court proceedings.

The plea alleges that the circulation of such recordings was not incidental but part of a “pre-planned conspiracy” intended to malign the image of the judiciary, mislead the public, and project the courts as being influenced by political pressure. It further claims that the manner in which the clips went viral suggests coordinated action to damage institutional credibility.

Specific social media posts have been cited in the petition, including those by senior political leaders who commented on Kejriwal’s submissions in court and called for judicial recusal. The petitioner also claims that Kejriwal himself reshared certain posts containing court proceedings and commentary.

The petition argues that the alleged acts violate the Delhi High Court Rules for Video Conferencing for Courts, 2021, as well as the Electronic Evidence and Video Conferencing Rules, 2025. It specifically relies on provisions that prohibit any unauthorised recording or publication of court proceedings unless expressly permitted by the court.

Under these rules, the petition notes, no person is permitted to record or publish any part of court proceedings conducted through video conferencing or otherwise, and any such unauthorised dissemination constitutes a breach of procedure and judicial discipline.