Delhi HC Gives Kejriwal, AAP Leaders Four Weeks to Reply in Contempt Case

Delhi HC Gives Kejriwal Four Weeks to Respond

The Delhi High Court on Monday granted former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and several Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders four weeks to file their replies in a criminal contempt case concerning alleged social media posts targeting Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.

A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Arun Bhardwaj listed the matter for further hearing on November 16, 2026. The direction came after Kejriwal's counsel submitted that the respondents had not received the complete material on which the contempt proceedings were based.

The court directed the registry to provide the relevant material and allowed the respondents four weeks to submit their replies.

Who Are the AAP Leaders Facing Proceedings?

The proceedings involve Kejriwal and several other AAP leaders, including:

• Manish Sisodia

• Sanjay Singh

• Saurabh Bharadwaj

• Vinay Mishra

• Durgesh Pathak

The allegations concern social media content that Justice Sharma had considered to be defamatory, contemptuous or vilifying.

The latest order is procedural. It gives the respondents an opportunity to obtain the material relied upon in the proceedings and present their responses. It does not constitute a final determination of criminal contempt.

What Is the Contempt Case About?

The case relates to social media posts and other online material concerning Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma's handling of proceedings connected with the Delhi excise policy case.

In May 2026, Justice Sharma initiated criminal contempt proceedings after taking note of material that she considered to be an attempt to vilify the judiciary and create what she described as a parallel narrative around the proceedings.

The High Court subsequently issued notices to Kejriwal and other respondents.

The allegations include social media posts concerning the judge's conduct and judicial decisions, as well as circulation of edited video clips and other online content.

Kejriwal's Counsel Sought Complete Material

During Monday's hearing, senior advocate Vikram Chaudhary, appearing for Kejriwal, told the court that the respondents had not yet received the complete material forming the basis of the contempt proceedings.

The bench directed the registry to provide the documents and other relevant material.

The respondents will now have four weeks from the court's direction to prepare and file their replies.

This means the next stage of the proceedings will focus on the responses filed by Kejriwal and the other respondents.

How Did the Dispute Begin?

The controversy developed in the context of the Delhi excise policy case.

A trial court had discharged Kejriwal, Sisodia and several others in the case on February 27, 2026. The CBI subsequently challenged the discharge order before the High Court.

Justice Sharma was associated with proceedings arising from the CBI's challenge.

Kejriwal, Sisodia and other AAP leaders subsequently sought her recusal from hearing the matter. The requests were rejected, after which the dispute escalated into a broader controversy over social media comments and public statements concerning the judge.

Justice Sharma Initiated Contempt Proceedings

On May 14, Justice Sharma initiated criminal contempt proceedings in connection with the alleged online campaign.

The proceedings covered Kejriwal, Sisodia, Sanjay Singh and other AAP leaders. An X user, Devesh Vishwakarma, was also among those against whom contempt proceedings were initiated.

In the May order, the court examined several social media posts and statements and considered whether they fell within the definition of criminal contempt.

The court's order also discussed an edited video that was allegedly presented as a speech by the judge at a political event, although the underlying speech had been delivered at an educational institution in Varanasi.

What Does Criminal Contempt Mean?

Criminal contempt generally concerns conduct that can interfere with the administration of justice, undermine the authority of a court or obstruct judicial proceedings.

In this case, the proceedings relate specifically to alleged social media content and public campaigning concerning a sitting judge.

The court will have to consider the material and the respondents' explanations before determining whether the legal requirements for contempt have been met.

Separate Contempt Petition Also Listed

A separate contempt petition filed by lawyer Ashok Chaitanya has also been listed for November 16.

That petition names Kejriwal and others, including AAP leader Gopal Rai and journalist Saurav Das. It alleges that the respondents were involved in an alleged coordinated social media campaign against Justice Sharma.

These allegations are also subject to judicial consideration and should not be treated as established findings.

Why November 16 Is Important

The Delhi High Court has fixed November 16 as the next date for hearing the contempt proceedings.

By that stage, Kejriwal and the other respondents are expected to have filed their replies after receiving the material on which the proceedings are based.

The court can then consider the responses and determine the subsequent course of the proceedings.

Contempt Case and Excise Policy Case Are Different Proceedings

An important distinction is that the contempt proceedings and the underlying excise policy litigation are separate legal issues.

The contempt case concerns alleged conduct and social media material involving Justice Sharma.

The excise policy case concerns allegations arising from the Delhi government's liquor-policy controversy and the subsequent criminal proceedings.

The High Court's consideration of the contempt allegations does not itself determine the merits of the underlying excise policy case.

What Did the Court Say About the Social Media Campaign?

The May order examined multiple statements and online posts attributed to or associated with respondents.

The court expressed concern about material that it considered to be aimed at questioning the judge's integrity or suggesting political connections. It also considered the circulation of edited video material and clips from court proceedings.

However, the respondents will have an opportunity to contest the allegations and explain their positions through the replies now permitted by the court.

What Happens After the Replies?

Once the respondents file their replies, the High Court can examine their explanations alongside the material forming the basis of the proceedings.

The court may then consider whether further evidence, submissions or hearings are required.

The November 16 hearing is therefore an important procedural stage, but it does not mean that the court has already reached a final conclusion on the contempt allegations.

Key Points at a Glance

IssueCurrent PositionCourtDelhi High CourtRespondentsArvind Kejriwal and other AAP leadersNature of caseCriminal contempt proceedingsMain allegationAlleged vilifying social media content targeting Justice Swarana Kanta SharmaLatest directionFour weeks to file repliesAdditional directionRegistry to provide relevant materialNext hearingNovember 16, 2026Related matterSeparate contempt petition also listedFinal findingNot yet made

Why the Case Matters

The proceedings highlight the legal questions that can arise when political criticism, social media campaigns and judicial proceedings intersect.

The case also involves questions about the limits of public commentary concerning judges and ongoing court proceedings.

For the respondents, the immediate issue is to review the material supplied by the registry and respond to the allegations within the period granted by the court.

For the High Court, the subsequent hearings will determine how the contempt proceedings progress.

What Happens Next?

Kejriwal and the other respondents have four weeks to file their replies.

The registry is expected to provide the material that their lawyers said had not been completely supplied. The respondents can use that material to address the allegations raised in the proceedings.

The Delhi High Court will hear the matter again on November 16, when the next stage of the contempt proceedings is expected to be considered.

Bottom Line

The Delhi High Court has granted Arvind Kejriwal and other AAP leaders four weeks to respond to criminal contempt proceedings concerning alleged social media posts targeting Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. The court has also directed its registry to provide material that the respondents said they had not received completely.

The proceedings originated from developments surrounding the Delhi excise policy case and allegations of an online campaign against the judge. A separate contempt petition has also been listed for hearing.

The next hearing is scheduled for November 16, 2026. The latest order is procedural and does not amount to a final finding that the respondents are guilty of criminal contempt.