Two benches of the Delhi High Court will on Tuesday hear criminal contempt proceedings against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders and the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) appeal against the lower court’s February 27 order removing former chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and others in the tax policy case.
A bench led by Justice Manoj Jain will hear CBI’s appeal against. A bench comprising Justices Naveen Chawla and Ravinder Dodija will handle the criminal contempt proceedings.
An unprecedented standoff began on February 27, when the lower court discharged Kejriwal and others in a tax policy case, prompting the CBI to approach the Supreme Court.
On March 9, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma stayed the trial court’s directions to take administrative action against a CBI officer and adjourned the Enforcement Directorate’s proceedings. Kejriwal sought to move the matter from her seat. Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya rejected it on March 13.
On April 5, Kejriwal and others sought Justice Sharma’s disqualification, which she rejected on April 20. Kejriwal informed the judge on April 27 that he would boycott the proceedings. AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak wrote similar letters.
On May 5, the court appointed senior lawyers amicus curiae to represent the three leaders, but the matter was postponed three times.
Justice Sharma initiated contempt proceedings against Kejriwal, Sisodia, Pathak, Sanjay Singh and Saurabh Bhardwaj for defamatory, contempt and defamation material posted against the judge on social media. She withdrew, saying that the law did not allow the judge who initiated the contempt proceedings to continue hearing the matter.
She explained that her previous order, issued on April 20, refusing to withdraw from the tax policy case, remains in place. Justice Sharma said she refused to resign because Kejriwal had adopted a course of “defamation” and “intimidation”. It noted that instead of challenging the order in the Supreme Court, Kejriwal chose to issue a letter boycotting the proceedings and posted a video in which, according to the court, he made false allegations against her that were decided in the April 20 judgment.
She said Kejriwal hatched a smear campaign by circulating and criticizing the matter on social media to ridicule the court. She said that his actions aimed to sow distrust among the general public against it, attribute political influence and lack of judicial independence to the court, and undermine its authority.
