The Delhi High Court on Monday came down heavily on the petitioner for filing a plea seeking the removal of Arvind Kejriwal, currently in judicial custody following his arrest in the Delhi excise policy case, despite the court turning down two similar pleas filed by others recently. The plea was moved by former Aam Aadmi Party MLA Sandeep Kumar.
“Heavy costs should be imposed on you,” the court remarked, rebuking the petitioner. The court said that similar petitions have been heard and rejected by the court of acting Chief Justice Manmohan, adding that the plea was nothing but a “publicity interest litigation” filed by the petitioner.
The plea was eventually transferred to the bench of the acting Chief Justice since it had already dealt with two petitions on the matter earlier. On March 28, the High Court rejected a PIL filed by one Surjit Singh Yadav on the ground that it was for the executive and the President to deal with the issue and not one for the court to intervene.
Again, on April 4, the court refused to admit a plea filed by Hindu Sena president Vishnu Gupta. The court said that it would Kejriwal’s call whether to continue as CM or not. “At times, personal interest has to be subordinate to national interest but that is his (Kejriwal’s) personal call,” the court said.
In the third plea, Sandeep Kumar argued that Kejriwal, though incapacitated, continues to hold the office of the Chief Minister of Delhi which not only raises several constitutional complications but also violates the guarantee of Right to Life of the people in Delhi.
Kumar sought a writ of quo warranto against Kejriwal, calling upon him to demonstrate by what authority, qualification, and title he holds the office of Chief Minister of Delhi under Article 239AA of the Constitution. Kumar requested that Kejriwal be removed from the office of Chief Minister of Delhi, with or without retrospective effect.
(With inputs from Bar & Bench)