Delhi High Court Initiates Contempt Proceedings Against Defamatory Posts
The Delhi High Court has announced plans to initiate contempt proceedings against individuals accused of posting defamatory content about Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma. The judge expressed her determination to address the derogatory remarks and emphasized the importance of maintaining the integrity of the judiciary. Political leaders, including Arvind Kejriwal and members of the Aam Aadmi Party, have also expressed their stance regarding the ongoing legal proceedings. This situation raises significant questions about judicial integrity and the implications of public discourse on the judiciary. Read on to learn more about the developments in this case.
| May 14, 2026, 15:32 IST
Contempt Proceedings Announced by Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court declared on Thursday its intention to initiate contempt proceedings against certain individuals accused of posting defamatory content against Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma. A detailed order is expected to be issued by the court at 5 PM today. Justice Sharma stated, "I was supposed to appoint an amicus curiae (court lawyer) today and had made efforts in this regard, with some senior lawyers agreeing to assist. However, I learned that some respondents were posting extremely derogatory, contemptuous, and defamatory material against me and this court, and I cannot remain silent. I have decided to commence contempt proceedings against some respondents and other defamers."
Political Leaders Respond
Arvind Kejriwal wrote to Justice Sharma, indicating that he would not participate in the proceedings pending before the judge. He expressed, "My hope for justice from Justice Swarn Kanta has diminished. Therefore, I have decided to follow the path of satyagraha as shown by Mahatma Gandhi." Following Kejriwal, Aam Aadmi Party leaders Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak also informed Justice Sharma via letters that they would appear in her court without legal representation. Previously, Justice Sharma had refused to recuse herself from hearing a petition filed by the CBI. The judge dismissed the request for her recusal, stating that accepting such petitions would set a troubling precedent. She emphasized that every unfounded and baseless allegation of bias or discrimination tarnishes not just an individual judge but also the collective integrity of the judiciary. The judge affirmed that the court would stand firm for itself and the judiciary whenever necessary, even if it seems challenging.