A Delhi High Court judge has recused himself from hearing a contempt public interest litigation (PIL) filed against former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. The development took place on Wednesday, April 22, 2026, during the scheduled hearing of the case.
Details of the Recusal
Justice Rajesh Kumar Singh, who was originally assigned to hear the matter, opted to step aside without citing any specific reason. The case has now been listed before a different bench for further proceedings. The recusal comes amid heightened political tensions surrounding the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader.
Parties Involved in the PIL
Besides Kejriwal, the contempt plea also names several other entities as respondents. These include prominent AAP leaders, the Delhi High Court administration, and major social media companies such as Meta Platforms, X (formerly Twitter), and Google. The PIL alleges that these parties have violated court orders related to the dissemination of information.
The petition, filed by a social activist, claims that certain statements and posts on social media platforms constitute contempt of court. It seeks strict action against the accused for allegedly undermining the judiciary's authority.
Legal and Political Implications
The recusal has added a new layer of complexity to the case. Legal experts suggest that the judge's decision to recuse himself may have been influenced by the high-profile nature of the case, which involves a prominent political figure. The matter is now expected to be heard by a different bench, potentially delaying the proceedings.
Political reactions have been mixed. While AAP supporters have welcomed the recusal, opposition parties have called for a swift and transparent hearing. The case highlights the ongoing friction between the judiciary and political leaders in India.
Background of the Contempt Plea
The contempt PIL was filed earlier this year, accusing Kejriwal and others of making derogatory remarks against the judiciary and spreading misinformation on social media. The plea also seeks to hold the social media platforms accountable for allowing such content to remain online.
The Delhi High Court had previously issued notices to all respondents, seeking their responses. However, the recusal of the presiding judge has now stalled the proceedings temporarily. The new bench is expected to take up the matter in the coming weeks.
As the case unfolds, it continues to draw significant public and media attention, reflecting the deep political divisions in the country.
