The Delhi High Court directed police to remove unauthorized videos of Arvind Kejriwal’s court arguments in the excise policy case. Court clarified recording proceedings without permission violates rules and strict action is necessary to prevent misuse of judicial process
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has directed Delhi Police to remove unauthorized video recordings showing Arvind Kejriwal’s arguments before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in the excise policy matter.
A High Court official said that recording court proceedings without authorization is not allowed. The official also noted that the High Court’s rules for online hearings specifically forbid recording and uploading or publishing videos of court proceedings.
The official further stated that action is being taken against “everyone on all social media platforms” that uploaded such videos. He added that the High Court has taken similar steps in the past and that Kejriwal’s video is among the instances the court has taken cognizance of.
The official said,
“We have taken steps. It [Kejriwal video] is one of the videos. In the past also we have taken action, and whenever such instances come to our knowledge, we write to them [law enforcement agencies] to take action,”
Kejriwal had appeared in person before the Delhi High Court on April 13 to argue his application seeking Justice Sharma’s recusal from the Delhi excise policy case. He reportedly argued for over an hour, after which videos of his submissions went viral on social media.
After Kejriwal, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta addressed the Court and opposed Kejriwal’s application.
The excise policy case relates to the year 2022, after the CBI registered an FIR alleging that the Delhi Excise Policy for 2021–22 was allegedly altered in a manner that enabled monopolisation and cartelisation of the liquor trade in Delhi.
The CBI case was registered on a complaint filed by Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena on July 20, 2022. The investigation agency alleged that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and its leaders received kickbacks from liquor manufacturers due to the alleged manipulation of the policy. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) later also registered a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in connection with the matter.
In February, a trial court on February 27 discharged Kejriwal and 22 other accused, and closed the case after concluding that no case had been made out against any of the accused. The CBI challenged that order before the Delhi High Court, where the proceedings are currently being heard by Justice Sharma.
On March 9, Justice Sharma issued notice in the matter and stayed the trial court’s direction regarding departmental proceedings against the CBI officer who investigated the case. The judge also recorded a prima facie finding that certain observations made by the trial court in its order were erroneous.
Subsequently, Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Durgesh Pathak, Vijay Nair, Arun Pillai, and Chanpreet Singh Rayat filed applications seeking Justice Sharma’s recusal. They argued that Justice Sharma’s previous orders and the manner in which the case is being conducted demonstrate bias, and that she should not continue to hear the matter.
They also pointed to the fact that Justice Sharma had attended an event hosted by Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad (ABAP), the legal wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).
The CBI opposed the recusal plea and rejected the allegations, denying that Judge Sharma is ideologically linked to ABAP. The agency maintained that simply attending a seminar organised by ABAP does not establish any ideological bias. It also argued that Justice Sharma has passed favourable orders in other matters involving individuals named in the excise policy case as well.
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE