The Delhi High Court on Thursday issued notice to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal over a petition alleging unauthorised circulation of courtroom proceedings.
The plea sought contempt of court action against the former chief minister over the video clips reportedly recorded during hearings before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma and subsequently shared on digital platforms without the court’s permission.
The petition contended that the recording and dissemination of such footage violated established norms governing judicial proceedings. It argues that courts function within a framework where transparency must be balanced with procedural discipline, and unauthorised recordings risk disturbing that balance. According to the plea, the selective publication of courtroom exchanges may create a distorted narrative, potentially affecting public perception and undermining confidence in the judicial process.
During the hearing, the High Court indicated that the matter involves broader questions relating to the sanctity of court proceedings in the digital age. It directed that responses be filed not only by Kejriwal but also by other individuals and platforms allegedly involved in sharing the videos. The court also took note of the need to address how such recordings entered the public domain in the first place, suggesting that accountability may extend beyond a single individual.
The controversy traces back to proceedings linked to the excise policy case, where submissions were made seeking the recusal of Justice Sharma. Portions of that hearing were reportedly captured and circulated online soon after. The plea contends that such actions are inconsistent with the rules governing video conferencing and court access, which clearly prohibit recording or dissemination without express authorisation.
The High Court’s intervention reflects a growing institutional concern over the misuse of digital tools in relation to judicial work. While technology has enhanced access to courts, it has also introduced new risks, particularly when content is taken out of context or shared without safeguards. The court appears to be examining not just the act of publication, but also its potential impact on the administration of justice.
At this stage, the issuance of notice does not amount to any finding of wrongdoing. It marks the beginning of a process through which the court will evaluate the allegations and the responses of those involved. The outcome of the case is likely to contribute to the evolving legal position on how far courtroom transparency can extend in an era where information can be recorded and disseminated almost instantly.
The matter ultimately underscores the need to preserve the integrity of judicial proceedings while navigating the realities of digital access. It highlights that while courts remain open institutions, the manner in which their proceedings are shared must remain within the bounds of law and respect for judicial authority.
The post Delhi High Court seeks response from Arvind Kejriwal over alleged circulation of courtroom videos appeared first on India Legal.