Delhi High Court will hear a PIL seeking the removal of Arvind Kejriwal from the post of Chief Minister of Delhi after he was arrested by ED in Liquor policy case, Tomorrow (March 28th). The PIL raises concerns over potential breaches of Kejriwal’s oath of secrecy and asserts that the lack of action by concerned authorities constitutes an abuse of power, warranting court intervention.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court is set to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) that demands the removal of Arvind Kejriwal from the Chief Ministerial position of Delhi, Tomorrow (March 28th). This comes after Kejriwal’s arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with the liquor policy case, marking a turbulent phase in Delhi’s political landscape. The PIL, which seeks judicial intervention for Kejriwal’s ouster, underscores the growing clamor for accountability and transparency in the administration’s conduct.
The case has been scheduled for hearing before a bench led by Acting Chief Justice (ACJ) Manmohan, raising anticipation among political circles and the general public alike. The PIL’s emergence follows the recent apprehension of Arvind Kejriwal, a figure long associated with anti-corruption campaigns and the leader of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which has significantly impacted the political discourse in the national capital.
The liquor policy case, which led to Kejriwal’s arrest, revolves around allegations of irregularities and corruption in the formulation and implementation of Delhi’s liquor policy. The Enforcement Directorate’s involvement signifies the seriousness of the allegations, suggesting potential financial misconduct within the government’s ranks. Kejriwal’s arrest has not only ignited political controversies but also raised questions about governance and ethical conduct.
The petitioner, in this case, argues that the Chief Minister’s arrest on such serious charges undermines public trust and governance ethics. They assert that allowing Kejriwal to continue in his role could hinder a fair investigation and impact the administrative machinery’s impartiality. The PIL reflects a broader concern over the integrity of public officials and their impact on governance standards.
This judicial inquiry comes at a critical time when public faith in elected representatives is increasingly scrutinized. The hearing by the Delhi High Court’s bench headed by ACJ Manmohan is awaited with bated breath, as it holds potential ramifications for Delhi’s political landscape and governance standards. The outcome could set a precedent for how legal frameworks intersect with political accountability in India.
The case also highlights the intricate balance between law, politics, and public perception. As the judiciary reviews the plea for Kejriwal’s removal, the principles of justice, democratic governance, and political accountability are under the spotlight. This situation underscores the complex dynamics between different branches of government and their roles in upholding constitutional values and public trust.
As the Delhi High Court prepares to hear the PIL, all eyes are on the proceedings that could have far-reaching implications for political conduct and governance norms in India. The judiciary’s decision will not only determine Arvind Kejriwal’s political fate but also reinforce the legal standards for holding public officials accountable in the face of serious allegations.
On Tuesday (26th March) a PIL was filed in the Delhi High Court to stop Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal from using his official powers while he’s in the custody of the Enforcement Directorate (ED). This comes after Kejriwal’s arrest due to allegations related to a money-laundering case linked to an excise policy scam.
Surjit Singh Yadav, the petitioner, is worried that Kejriwal’s actions while in custody could go against the law and interfere with a fair investigation. Kejriwal, who leads the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), was arrested on March 21, and his custody was extended until March 28. He’s accused of being involved in a conspiracy regarding the excise policy, supposedly benefiting specific groups.
Yadav, a social activist, argues that Kejriwal’s ability to do his job as a public servant is compromised while he’s in custody. The petition suggests that Kejriwal’s actions might break the oath of secrecy he took, as any orders he gives have to be approved by the ED, the agency holding him.
The petition also criticized the central government, the ED, and the Delhi government for not stopping Kejriwal from giving orders while in custody. It says allowing these communications to reach other officials, like Delhi Minister Atishi, is an abuse of power.
“The respondent no. 4 (Kejriwal), while issuing direction/order while in the custody of the respondent no. 2 (ED), is breaching his oath of secrecy administered to him under the Third Schedule of the Constitution of India, as any directions/orders passed by him would have to be scanned thoroughly by the respondent no. 2 as they are in charge of the custody of the respondent no. 4.”
The PIL says–
“The inaction by the respondent nos. 1-3 (the Centre, ED, and Delhi government) to restrain the respondent no. 4 from issuing directions or orders while in custody and communicating the said orders to the respondent no. 5 (Delhi minister Atishi) is a gross example of abuse of power and position and merits interference by this hon’ble court,”
-it has claimed.
Furthermore, the petition asks the court to tell the ED not to give Kejriwal access to things like a typist, computer, or printer so he can’t issue orders from custody. The petitioner, Yadav, earlier filed another petition, which asked for Kejriwal to be removed as chief minister after his arrest.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Arvind Kejriwal
Click Here to Read Previous Reports of Delhi Excise Policy Scam
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
