UPDATE: May 15, 2026
In a major development on May 14, 2026, during the same hearing in which she initiated contempt proceedings, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court recused herself from further hearing the main excise policy case but made it clear that she will continue to preside over the contempt proceedings she has drawn.
The judge transferred the CBI’s revision petition challenging the trial court’s February 2025 order discharging Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and 21 others in the 2021-22 Delhi Excise Policy case to another bench. She stated that since she has initiated criminal contempt action against Kejriwal and other AAP leaders, continuing to hear the main matter could give rise to a perception of bias or grudge.
Justice Sharma, however, stood firmly by her earlier order (dated April 20, 2026) rejecting the recusal applications filed by Kejriwal, Sisodia and others. She clarified that the recusal from the main case was necessitated solely by the subsequent initiation of contempt proceedings and not by any earlier demands made by the accused.
Contempt proceedings initiated against: Justice Sharma drew contempt proceedings against AAP national convenor Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and AAP leaders Durgesh Pathak, Sanjay Singh, Vinay Mishra, and Saurabh Bharadwaj.
The judge described the actions as a “coordinated campaign of vilification” involving social media posts, letters, and edited videos that questioned her impartiality, dragged her family into the controversy, and attempted to intimidate the court. She observed that instead of challenging the court’s orders before the Supreme Court, Kejriwal and others chose to take the matter to social media and run a parallel narrative outside the court.
Key observations by the court:
“It could be that if I keep hearing this (excise policy) case, Arvind Kejriwal and other people might think that I have a grudge against him. That is why I have thought that this particular case will be heard by some other bench.”
“This would mean that if a person does not like the judge he can publicly accuse him of bias, publish letter and video and it will lead to anarchy.”
“Arvind Kejriwal tried to sow seeds of distrust against the judiciary Some of the contemnors were armed by political power. Videos were circulated which were edited. They chose to intimidate me.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju requested the judge to continue hearing the main excise policy matter, but Justice Sharma declined, saying a judge who has drawn contempt proceedings against the litigants cannot hear the underlying case.
The excise policy case will now be listed before another bench as per the orders of the Chief Justice. The contempt proceedings initiated by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma will proceed separately before her.
Arvind Kejriwal Cannot Intimidate Me: Delhi High Court Judge Launches Contempt Proceedings Over Vilifying Posts in Excise Policy Case
New Delhi, May 14, 2026 | In a sharp assertion of judicial authority, Delhi High Court Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Thursday initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against certain respondents and other individuals in the high-profile Delhi excise policy case. The move follows the circulation of what the judge described as “extremely vilifying, extremely contemptuous, and defamatory material” targeting her and the court on social media. Justice Sharma made the announcement while hearing the CBI’s revision petition challenging the February 2025 trial court order that had discharged AAP national convenor Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, and 21 others. She was set to name amicus curiae to assist the court in the matter after the accused boycotted proceedings.Judge’s Stern Warning: I Cannot Stay Silent
Addressing the courtroom directly, Justice Sharma stated “It has come to my notice that extremely vilifying, extremely contemptuous, and defamatory material is being posted by some of the respondents against me and against this court and I cannot stay silent. I have decided to draw contempt proceedings against some of the respondents and some other contemnors.” She added that a detailed order on the contempt action would be pronounced at 5 PM on the same day. The remarks came amid growing tension after Kejriwal and other accused chose to boycott hearings before her bench following the rejection of their recusal plea in April. Legal observers view the contempt initiation as a direct response to what the court perceives as an orchestrated campaign to pressure or discredit the judge.The Escalating Drama: From Recusal Plea to Full Boycott
The excise policy case revolves around allegations of irregularities and kickbacks in the Delhi government’s 2021-22 liquor policy. A trial court had given a clean chit to all 23 accused in February 2025, prompting the CBI to file a revision petition before the High Court. In April, Kejriwal appeared in person and sought Justice Sharma’s recusal, citing alleged bias. The judge rejected the plea, observing that mere unfounded apprehensions could not force a judge to step aside. Shortly after, Kejriwal wrote a letter to the court declaring he would neither appear personally nor through counsel, invoking Mahatma Gandhi’s principle of satyagraha and claiming “his hope of getting justice” had been shattered. Manish Sisodia and others followed suit with similar boycotts. With the accused opting out, the court had planned to appoint senior advocates as amicus curiae to ensure fair representation. Instead, Thursday’s hearing took an unexpected turn when Justice Sharma prioritised the issue of defamatory online content. No immediate reaction from Kejriwal or the AAP was available as of the latest updates. The contempt proceedings are now live alongside the main revision petition, marking a significant escalation in the long-running legal battle. What happens next remains to be seen. The detailed contempt order at 5 PM is expected to name the specific contemnors and outline the next steps in this high-stakes confrontation between the judiciary and the accused. Also Read:Kejriwal’s Discharge in Delhi Excise Policy Case – A Tactical Win for AAP, But CBI Holds the Long Game
This article was first published on May 14, 2026 and has been updated with the latest developments from the same day’s proceedings.
