Arvind Kejriwal

The renovation and extension of 6 Flagstaff Road became a major controversy. The CAG identified substantial cost increases and deficiencies in procedure and documentation; vigilance authorities requested investigations.

State of the evidence

CAG audit, costs and administrative investigations documented

Attribution

political responsibility as occupant and head of government; no automatic attribution of every irregularity

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma initiated criminal contempt proceedings against Kejriwal and several AAP leaders, finding prima facie that a digital campaign had targeted the judge and the judiciary during the excise litigation.

State of the evidence

initiating order, notices and court appearances documented

Legal status — source text

proceedings pending; by 4 August 2026, Kejriwal and the other leaders had appeared and been granted four weeks to respond

Attribution

Kejriwal personally named among those alleged to be in contempt; no conviction at this stage

Following press conferences questioning Gujarat University's transparency concerning Narendra Modi's degree, the university brought criminal defamation proceedings against Kejriwal and Sanjay Singh.

State of the evidence

complaint, summons and High Court decisions documented

Legal status — source text

Gujarat High Court dismissed several applications by Kejriwal and Sanjay Singh in January 2026; defamation trial not concluded

Attribution

personal responsibility for remarks concerning the university and the degree

During the Delhi election campaign, Kejriwal accused the Haryana government of sending Delhi 'poisoned' Yamuna water, prompting a complaint and a court notice.

State of the evidence

remarks and proceedings before a Sonepat court documented

Legal status — source text

court notice issued; no conviction identified

Attribution

personal responsibility for the public allegation

A court ordered an FIR to be registered following a complaint accusing Kejriwal and local officials of using public funds to install large advertising hoardings in Dwarka.

State of the evidence

court order and FIR documented

Legal status — source text

FIR registered by Delhi Police on 26 March 2025; no conviction identified

Attribution

Kejriwal directly named alongside former local elected representatives

Kejriwal retweeted a video by Dhruv Rathee containing allegations against the BJP IT cell. A complainant brought defamation proceedings, which the Delhi High Court allowed to continue before the Supreme Court intervened.

State of the evidence

retweet, summons and High Court/Supreme Court decisions documented

Legal status — source text

Supreme Court stayed the proceedings in 2024 while a settlement was considered; no conviction identified

Attribution

personal responsibility for the retweet; its legal implications remain disputed

Delhi Chief Secretary Anshu Prakash claimed that AAP legislators had assaulted him during a meeting at Kejriwal's residence. Kejriwal and Sisodia were implicated in the proceedings.

State of the evidence

complaint and judicial decisions documented

Legal status — source text

Kejriwal and Sisodia discharged; Delhi High Court upheld their discharge in 2022

Attribution

Kejriwal was accused of participating or being present, but proceedings ended in his favour

Course of the proceedings

1. Formally charged — Formal charge before the current outcome

Former AAP leader Kumar Vishwas claimed that Kejriwal had been prepared to rely on separatist elements to gain power in Punjab, triggering a national controversy.

State of the evidence

public allegation and responses documented

Legal status — source text

no judicial proof or personal indictment established

Attribution

direct, unproven allegation by a former associate

Kejriwal called for flights from Singapore to be suspended, claiming that a new coronavirus variant had emerged there and threatened children. Singapore protested, and the Indian government reiterated that a regional head of government does not speak on India's behalf.

State of the evidence

statement and diplomatic reactions documented

Legal status — source text

no personal criminal proceedings

Attribution

personal responsibility for the statement

In January 2014, Kejriwal and AAP ministers staged a sit-in near Rail Bhavan to demand action against police officers. Proceedings subsequently led to charges being framed in relation to the assembly and disobedience.

State of the evidence

protest, complaint and framing of charges documented

Legal status — source text

Delhi court framed charges in 2019; no subsequent conviction identified

Attribution

personal responsibility as organiser and participant in the sit-in

The Kejriwal government appointed 21 AAP legislators as parliamentary secretaries, prompting an 'office of profit' challenge. Twenty legislators were disqualified before the High Court overturned the decision for failure to follow a fair procedure.

State of the evidence

appointments, Election Commission opinion, disqualification and High Court judgment documented

Legal status — source text

Delhi High Court overturned the disqualification of 20 AAP legislators and referred the matter back to the Election Commission for a fair hearing

Attribution

Kejriwal's political responsibility for the appointments; disqualifications concerned the legislators

Person targeted by the proceedings

Delhi High Court

Role of the person profiled

Protagonist not prosecuted

Kejriwal and other AAP leaders accused Arun Jaitley of irregularities during his presidency of the DDCA. Jaitley brought defamation proceedings. Kejriwal subsequently apologised, saying he had been misinformed.

State of the evidence

allegations, proceedings, apologies and settlement documented

Legal status — source text

defamation cases settled or withdrawn in 2018 following apologies

Attribution

personal responsibility for the allegations against Jaitley

Kejriwal had accused former Punjab minister Bikram Singh Majithia of involvement in drug trafficking. In 2018, he withdrew the statements and apologised, describing the allegations as unfounded.

State of the evidence

allegations, complaint and apology documented

Legal status — source text

complaint withdrawn following apology

Attribution

personal responsibility for the allegations

Kejriwal had named Nitin Gadkari among the most corrupt politicians. In 2018, he expressed regret for statements made without sufficient verification, and the parties requested closure of the case.

State of the evidence

remarks, complaint, expression of regret and acquittal following withdrawal documented

Legal status — source text

court acquitted Kejriwal following settlement and withdrawal of the complaint

Attribution

personal responsibility for unverified allegations

Course of the proceedings

1. Formally charged — Formal charge before the current outcome

Kejriwal had accused lawyer Amit Sibal of a conflict of interest arising from professional cases handled while his father, Kapil Sibal, was a minister. In 2018, he stated that the allegations were unfounded, withdrew them and apologised.

State of the evidence

remarks, complaint, apologies and acquittal following withdrawal documented

Legal status — source text

court acquitted Kejriwal and Sisodia following an agreement

Attribution

personal responsibility for the allegations

Course of the proceedings

1. Formally charged — Formal charge before the current outcome