A Delhi High Court judge, Justice Tejas Karia, on Wednesday recused himself from hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking contempt action against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders, including Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia. The PIL alleged that the leaders had uploaded and shared clips of court hearings related to Kejriwal’s plea for the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in the liquor policy case.
Information was available with The Chenab Times that the PIL, filed by advocate Vaibhav Singh, was listed before a bench comprising Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Karia. The bench directed that the matter be listed for hearing before a different bench on Thursday.
The court stated, “This matter will not be heard by this Bench. List tomorrow before a Bench of which one of us, Justice Tejas Karia, is not a member.” The counsel representing the petitioner requested that the case be transferred to another bench already handling a similar issue.
In addition to the AAP leaders, the PIL has named the Delhi High Court administration and major social media platforms—Meta Platforms, X (formerly Twitter), and Google—as parties. Justice Karia, who previously worked as a partner at a prominent law firm, had represented Meta in numerous cases prior to his elevation to the bench.
The petitioner, Vaibhav Singh, submitted in his PIL that the unauthorised dissemination of court recordings on social media platforms can compromise the independence of the judiciary. He further noted that such actions are explicitly prohibited under the rules of the High Court.
The plea claims that several AAP leaders and members of other opposition parties, including Congress leader Digvijay Singh, had “intentionally and deliberately recorded and circulated” videos of Kejriwal’s appearance before Justice Sharma on April 13. These videos were allegedly shared on social media with the intent to damage the court’s public image.
The PIL further alleged that Kejriwal and his party members had orchestrated a “conspiracy” and a “dirty strategy” to record court proceedings. The petitioner urged the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the matter and initiate contempt proceedings against “all respondents who uploaded, reposted, forwarded the recording of court proceedings dated 13.04.2026.” The petition also sought the removal of the circulated content from social media platforms.
On April 15, Singh had lodged a formal complaint with the High Court’s Registrar General regarding the alleged unauthorised recording of court proceedings. Earlier, on Monday, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma had declined to recuse herself from hearing the liquor-policy case. She stated that a litigant cannot be permitted to question a judge’s conduct without substantive grounds and that judges should not recuse themselves based on a litigant’s unsubstantiated apprehension of bias.
The Chenab Times News Desk