‘Even Dawood Ibrahim would contest’: Delhi HC junks plea seeking to allow arrested politicians to campaign in LS polls

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking an established method for arrested political figures and candidates to campaign via video conference.

A division bench of acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora decided not to penalise the petitioner, a law student, but advised their counsel to explain the concept of separation of powers to them.

Also Read:Hindu marriage only valid if done in accordance with rituals like saptapadi, rules Supreme Court

“You want all the people arrested to be allowed to campaign in elections through VC. I am telling you, if this is done, all the dreaded criminals will form political parties. Dawood Ibrahim would contest election and campaign through VC,” ACJ Manmohan said as quoted by the Bar and Bench.

The bench showed its reluctance to delve into political matters, stating the persistent trend of people expecting the Court to intervene in political issues. ACJ Manmohan mentioned that recently the court has been handling many petitions where people either ask for someone to be put in jail or to be let go.

Also Read:Delhi HC to hear plea seeking ban on circulation of deep fake videos during Lok Sabha elections

The court noted the presence of propaganda in the petition and emphasised its awareness of such tactics. It also recognised the petition’s attempt to involve the Court in a strategic manoeuvre, noting the inclusion of publicity efforts. Additionally, the Court considered the petition to be contrary to fundamental legal principles.

“People have this notion that we (Courts) are not bound by the law… You (petitioner) are asking us to act contrary to the law. You are asking us to legislate,” the Court said.

Also Read:SIT issues notices to Prajwal Revanna, HD Revanna in sexual abuse case

The Court warned of charging more than Rs 75,000 from the petitioner for filing the plea despite a previous rejection of a similar request for bail for Arvind Kejriwal, which also incurred costs of Rs 75,000.

When the petitioner’s counsel highlighted the petitioner’s status as a law student and suggested to not impose costs, the bench responded that it would waive costs if the counsel educates the petitioner on the principle of separation of powers.

Amarjeet Gupta, the petitioner, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) urging the Election Commission of India (ECI) to establish a system permitting arrested leaders to campaign via video conference, except in cases of conviction.

Gupta argued that he was dismayed by the timing of arrests of several political figures following the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) for the upcoming Lok Sabha elections on March 16, 2024.

He referred to the arrest of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, stating that it deprived the people of Delhi of their fundamental right to receive information from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) by participating as spectators/listeners in the election campaign.

The plea noted that Kejriwal’s arrest curtailed voters’ right to be informed about the ideology, plans, and programs of the AAP. “Further, the leaders of political parties are also deprived of their constitutionally guaranteed fundamental and legal right to campaign during the election,” the plea argued.