Delhi HC issues contempt notices to Gopal Rai, journalist over posts targeting judge

The Delhi High Court has issued criminal contempt notices to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Gopal Rai and investigative journalist Saurav Das over alleged circulation of defamatory and contemptuous social media content targeting Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in connection with the Delhi excise policy case.

A Division Bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja passed the order while hearing a petition filed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and Article 215 of the Constitution. The petition accused several individuals of orchestrating an online campaign aimed at undermining the judiciary.

The petitioner had also sought contempt proceedings against former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and AAP leader Saurabh Bharadwaj. However, the Bench noted that notices had already been issued to them in separate suo motu contempt proceedings initiated earlier by the High Court. The court directed that both matters be heard together and fixed the next hearing for 4 August.

The High Court instructed the newly added respondents to file their replies before the next hearing and directed the Registry to preserve all relevant social media material cited in the petition. Copies of the case records were also ordered to be supplied to senior advocate Rajdipa Behura, who has been appointed as amicus curiae to assist the court in the matter.

According to the petition, the controversy arose after a trial court discharged Kejriwal and other accused in the alleged excise policy corruption case. The Central Bureau of Investigation subsequently challenged that decision before the Delhi High Court, where the matter came before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.

The petitioner alleged that attempts were then made to seek the transfer of the case and Justice Sharma’s recusal. During the pendency of those applications, a coordinated campaign was allegedly launched on social media platform X, publishing content accusing the judge of bias and conflict of interest based on purported professional associations involving members of her family.

Earlier this week, the High Court had already issued notices in suo motu contempt proceedings against Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh and other AAP leaders over alleged attempts to scandalise the judiciary in relation to the same case.

Justice Sharma, in an earlier order, had observed that a “coordinated social media campaign” had been carried out after she declined to recuse herself from hearing the matter. The judge stated that while criticism of judicial decisions is permissible, efforts to portray judges as biased through organised online attacks crossed constitutional limits.

She later recused herself from the excise policy case, saying the matter could be reassigned to avoid any perception of prejudice. The case was subsequently transferred to Justice Manoj Jain, who is hearing the CBI’s revision plea challenging the discharge of Kejriwal, Sisodia and others.

The trial court had earlier cleared all accused in the case, ruling that the now-scrapped excise policy emerged from a consultative process and that investigators had failed to establish a criminal conspiracy. The CBI has challenged that finding, alleging that the policy was manipulated to favour select liquor traders in exchange for kickbacks.

With IANS inputs