The Delhi Assembly Secretariat told the High Court that Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia’s challenge to the Privileges Committee summons in the ‘Phansi Ghar’ case is premature. It said the panel is only verifying facts and no breach of privilege or contempt proceedings have been initiated yet.
New Delhi: The Delhi Legislative Assembly on Friday informed the Delhi High Court that the petitions filed by former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia challenging the summons issued to them by the Assembly’s Privileges Committee are premature and not maintainable at this stage.
The submissions were made by the Assembly’s counsel, Jayant Mehta, before a Bench of Justice Sachin Datta.
Mehta told the Court that the Privileges Committee has not yet made any finding of breach of privilege or contempt of the House against the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders and is only examining facts related to the controversy surrounding the so-called “Phansi Ghar” inside the Delhi Assembly premises.
Mehta explained that the committee is currently only trying to verify whether the chamber in question was actually used as a gallows during British rule, as claimed earlier by the previous AAP government.
He said that the failure of Kejriwal and Sisodia to appear before the committee is preventing it from completing this fact-finding exercise. According to him, non-appearance before the committee itself amounts to contempt of the House, which is a serious constitutional issue.
Mehta submitted,
“The writ petition is completely premature. The committee is yet to come to the conclusion. There have been no allegations (of breach of privilege and contempt of house), against them (AAP leaders). The committee is currently examining. Breach of privilege motion is yet to be moved in the house.. Non appearance amounts to contempt of the house, thus it’s a very very serious matter…. At the moment they have only been called for facts.. None’s life or liberty is being threatened in any manner, whatsoever,”
The senior counsel further told the Court that the matter was referred to the Privileges Committee only after it was discussed on the floor of the House. He added that the current Speaker, Vijender Gupta, had referred the issue to the committee following due deliberation in the Assembly.
The controversy began earlier this year after Speaker Vijender Gupta rejected the earlier AAP government’s claim that a particular chamber in the Delhi Assembly building was once used by the British to hang freedom fighters.
During the AAP government’s tenure in 2022, the chamber had been converted into a memorial dedicated to “martyrs”. It included murals of Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev, a symbolic hanging rope, and walls designed in a red-brick heritage style.
A plaque installed at the site, credited to then Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and then Speaker Ram Niwas Goel, stated that
“Innumerable unknown freedom fighters have been hanged here.”
However, during the monsoon session of the Assembly in August this year, Speaker Vijender Gupta disputed this claim.
He presented official building maps and records to show that the chamber was actually a service shaft or a tiffin lift area and not a gallows used during the freedom struggle.
After this disclosure, the chamber was renamed the “Tiffin Room”, and the plaque, symbolic rope and other memorial elements were removed.
Following this, the Privileges Committee issued summons on November 4 to four AAP leaders, including Kejriwal and Sisodia, directing them to appear before it on November 13.
The committee stated that their presence was required to verify the authenticity of the “Phansi Ghar” which had been restored and inaugurated during the previous Assembly term.
Challenging these summons, Kejriwal and Sisodia approached the Delhi High Court. In their petition, they argued that the notices were issued without following the prescribed procedure.
They also contended that the Privileges Committee does not have the power to verify the historical authenticity of a structure and that such an inquiry falls outside the scope of the Assembly’s privilege jurisdiction.
The petition further argued that the acts and decisions taken during the 7th Delhi Legislative Assembly cannot be examined through a privilege inquiry initiated during the 8th Assembly’s tenure. According to the AAP leaders, allowing such an inquiry would set a dangerous precedent.
The matter will now be heard next on January 8, when counsel appearing for Kejriwal and Sisodia is expected to file rejoinder submissions responding to the arguments made by the Delhi Legislative Assembly.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Arvind Kejriwal
