New Delhi, Apr 16 (PTI) Responding to Arvind Kejriwal’s claim that Delhi High Court judge Swarana Kanta Sharma has a “direct conflict of interest”, the CBI on Thursday said there is a premeditated and vitriolic online campaign against the judge as selective and contemptuous information is being floated on social media at the behest of the AAP supremo and others to pressure her.
In its written submissions, the agency said misinformation carrying “wild insinuations” regarding government-panel work given to the judge’s children is being circulated on social media.
Demanding that such “unholy, unhealthy and anarchist practices” be nipped in the bud in the larger interest of the judiciary, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) said Justice Sharma’s recusal following an “orchestrated social media campaign” would set a very wrong precedent.
Earlier in the day, Justice Sharma allowed the former Delhi chief minister’s request to take his additional affidavit on the issue of conflict of interest on record, after he appeared virtually before her to mention the issue.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the CBI would file its written submissions in response.
Kejriwal has raised several objections against the judge, who is hearing the CBI’s plea against his discharge in the Delhi liquor policy case, including that she had earlier denied him relief on his petition challenging his arrest, refused to grant relief on the bail pleas of other accused, including Manish Sisodia and K Kavitha, and also made “strong and conclusive” findings.
In his additional affidavit dated April 14, which was filed after the court reserved its order on the issue of recusal a day before, Kejriwal has claimed that the judge’s children are empanelled central government lawyers who receive work through the solicitor general, who is appearing in the matter for the CBI.
Relying on documents in the public domain, including information received under the Right to Information (RTI) Act mechanism, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader has alleged that substantial legal work was allocated to Justice Sharma’s son.
The CBI contended that the additional affidavit is a “belated attempt” to further malign the institution and that if Kejriwal’s contentions are accepted, all judges in the country would be disqualified from hearing matters of political leaders if their relatives are on any government panel.
Kejriwal’s conduct raises a larger issue of letting institutional integrity being compromised by “unscrupulous litigants” who attempt to browbeat and pressure the judges as the “modus operandi of making wild allegations and misusing social media can be adopted by any litigant”, the agency emphasised.
The CBI also contended that the RTI being referred to by Kejriwal was filed by a person who was not a party to the present proceedings but was present during all the hearings in this case and the information received under the RTI Act is also being deliberately misrepresented on social media at the AAP leader’s behest.
The moment Justice Sharma passed the order directing the CBI to file a response to the recusal applications, suddenly, the RTI applicant posted a message on X “disclosing” the details that he had since March, which was immediately shared by Kejriwal and other leaders of his party in tandem, the agency alleged.
“From April 9, 2026 onwards, there is a very selective, premeditated and vitriolic online campaign designedly launched by tweeting and re-tweeting the same misinformation making wild insinuations regarding the government panel work with the sole purpose of either embarrassing this Hon’ble bench or to bring pressure upon the bench,” the submissions said.
“If half-baked, selective, defamatory and contemptuous information is floated at the behest of respondent no. 18 Shri Arvind Kejriwal and other respondents with clear intention to embarrass this Hon’ble bench and also to put pressure on other judges who would happen to deal with similar cases, it will surely have the tendency to bring the majesty, dignity and impartiality of every judge into question,” the submissions added.
The CBI further said judges cannot even respond to such false and baseless campaigns on social media and it was high time that a message went from “this constitutional court that unscrupulous persons, by using social media and applications containing wild allegations cannot embarrass, malign and thereby, pressure any judge to protect an undefendable order and achieve a desired result”. PTI ADS RC
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.