The Delhi High Court has issued notices to journalist Saurav Das and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Gopal Rai in connection with a criminal contempt of court petition. The petition, filed by advocate Ashok Chaitanya, accuses the two of orchestrating a campaign against Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. This judicial action emerged from allegations that Das and Rai engaged in a coordinated effort to malign the judge on social media platforms.
The Division Bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja refrained from issuing notices to AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal and another party leader, Saurabh Bharadwaj, as they are already entangled in contempt proceedings initiated suo motu by the High Court concerning the same issues with Justice Sharma. The court has decided to consolidate both the suo motu contempt proceedings and Chaitanya’s petition for joint hearing.
Senior Advocate Rajdipa Behura has been appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist in the matter. The plea against Das and the AAP leaders was filed following consent from Sanjeev Bhandari, the Additional Standing Counsel (Criminal) for the Delhi government.
The allegations against Kejriwal, Das, Bharadwaj, and Rai involve the dissemination of content on the social media platform X, which supposedly contains unsubstantiated and scandalous claims against Justice Sharma. The petition claims these actions were timed strategically during ongoing judicial proceedings to undermine the court’s authority and disrupt the due course of justice.
Chaitanya’s petition further argues that the accusations are factually incorrect and misleading, suggesting that the empanelment of advocates by governmental entities is a standard procedure based on merit and professional competence. The plea highlights that attributing impropriety to such processes is fundamentally baseless and intended to tarnish the judge’s reputation.
More Read
The petition also references Kejriwal’s tweet about boycotting proceedings before Justice Sharma, labeling it as contemptuous. The High Court’s suo motu case against Kejriwal and other AAP leaders was initiated on May 14 following a series of derogatory social media posts against Justice Sharma.
Previously, Kejriwal, along with other AAP leaders, had sought Justice Sharma’s recusal from the excise policy case, in which they are accused. Justice Sharma rejected this recusal request on April 20, emphasizing that such actions cannot be allowed to foster distrust in the judiciary.
The ongoing contempt proceedings are being overseen by the bench headed by Justice Navin Chawla, as the court seeks to address these serious allegations and uphold judicial integrity.
