The Delhi High Court on Thursday, 23 April 2026, ordered the takedown of unauthorised video recordings of court proceedings from social media platforms in a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking contempt action against Arvind Kejriwal and others for circulating clips from hearing of Kejriwal’s plea seeking recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from his Delhi liquor policy case. The court also issued notices to former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and others.
A division bench comprising Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora heard the PIL filed by advocate Vaibhav Singh. The petition alleged that Kejriwal and several other Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders, along with others, unauthorisedly recorded and shared videos and snippets of proceedings from 13 April 2026 before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. During that hearing, Kejriwal had sought her recusal in the ongoing liquor policy case, citing alleged bias related to her children’s roles as central government panel counsel.
Justice Sharma had dismissed the recusal petition, observing that no material showing bias was produced and that a litigant cannot judge a judge on unfounded apprehensions.
The petitioner contended that the recording and circulation of the proceedings violated the Delhi High Court’s Video Conferencing Rules, which prohibit unauthorised recording or publication without express permission of the court. He argued that the videos were selectively shared on platforms including Meta (Facebook and Instagram), Google (YouTube), and X to scandalise the judiciary, mislead the public, and portray the court as acting under political pressure.
The PIL described this as part of a larger “conspiracy” with a political agenda and sought, among other reliefs, initiation of contempt proceedings, removal of all such videos, restraint on politicians from sharing court proceedings, and the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the matter. It also invoked obligations under the Information Technology Rules, 2021, requiring intermediaries to prevent hosting of illegal content.
During the hearing, the bench directed the takedown of specific portions of the proceedings from Google and X. It issued notices to Kejriwal, other AAP leaders including Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh, Congress leader Digvijaya Singh, journalist Ravish Kumar, the social media intermediaries, the Delhi High Court administration, and the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
The court granted liberty to the petitioner to provide further URLs of offending content to the platforms for immediate removal and observed concerns regarding unauthorised access to video-conferencing systems, noting that participants give undertakings against recording or misuse.
The bench highlighted the broader institutional interest in controlling the circulation of court proceedings and questioned the feasibility of platforms proactively monitoring and removing such content without specific notifications, while acknowledging technological limitations. Meta submitted that it had already taken down certain communicated URLs, while Google contended it did not host the recordings. The court directed the intermediaries to file affidavits detailing their stands and called for counter-affidavits from the respondents.
The matter has been adjourned for further hearing on 6 July 2026. The PIL was filed shortly after the petitioner complained to the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court on 15 April 2026 regarding the circulation of the videos.
