Delhi High Court orders removal of Kejriwal’s court videos

April 15, 2026

New Delhi:  The Delhi High Court has directed the police to remove all videos circulating on social media showing Arvind Kejriwal arguing before Justice Swaran Kanta Sharma during a hearing on the Delhi Excise Policy case.

Strict stance on unauthorized videos

This directive comes amid a controversy over unauthorized recording and broadcasting of court proceedings. According to registry officials, action is being initiated against those recording and uploading in violation of video conferencing rules.

Officials said this is not the first time; action has been taken against those posting videos of court proceedings on social media.

Serious allegations in lawyer’s complaint

Earlier, advocate Vaibhav Singh filed a complaint with the Delhi High Court regarding the audio-video recording of the April 13 hearing.

In his complaint, he alleged that Kejriwal and other AAP leaders deliberately recorded the court proceedings and shared them on social media platforms, which is a violation of the rules.

He stated that this is a clear violation of the Delhi High Court’s Video Conferencing Rules 2021 and the Electronic Evidence and Video Conferencing Rules 2025.

Conspiracy and allegations of tarnishing the image of the judiciary

The complaint also alleged that these videos were widely shared on platforms like X, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, as part of a conspiracy to tarnish the image of the judiciary and mislead the public.

The complaint demanded a detailed investigation into the matter and strict action against the culprits.

Hearing on Recusal Petition

The April 13 hearing was related to Kejriwal’s petition in which he sought Justice Swaran Kanta Sharma’s recusal from the case.

Kejriwal personally argued in court for approximately 45 minutes, stating that he is no longer an accused in the case because the trial court had granted him and the other accused relief due to a lack of evidence to support the charges.

He also stated that Justice Sharma’s subsequent order raised concerns about a fair trial.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed the petition, arguing that the legal standards for recusal must be followed and that the dignity of the court must be maintained.

After hearing arguments from all parties, the High Court reserved its decision and directed the parties to submit written submissions.