The Delhi High Court Today (April 8th) rebuked a former AAP MLA-Sandeep Kumar who approached the court seeking instructions to oust Arvind Kejriwal from his position as CM of Delhi. This move came subsequent to Kejriwal’s arrest by the ED in connection to the money laundering case linked to the Delhi excise policy scam.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court today expressed its disapproval towards a former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) legislator-Sandeep Kumar, who petitioned the Court to mandate the removal of Arvind Kejriwal from the position of Chief Minister (CM) of Delhi. This petition emerged in the wake of Kejriwal’s detention by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) over allegations related to a money laundering case that is tied to the scandal surrounding Delhi’s excise policy.
Justice Subramonium Prasad articulated the Court’s displeasure towards the petitioner, Sandeep Kumar, highlighting the redundancy of his plea given the dismissal of two similar petitions previously. The Court voiced a strong opinion, suggesting,
“Heavy costs should be imposed on you.”
This comment underscores the judiciary’s frustration with what it perceives as frivolous or publicity-seeking legal actions.
The case was presented before a single-judge bench, where it was noted that this matter mirrored those already deliberated and dismissed by a bench led by acting Chief Justice Manmohan. It was concluded that Kumar’s petition was essentially a bid for publicity, leading to its transfer to the bench of the acting Chief Justice, which had experience with analogous cases.
This incident marks the third unsuccessful attempt to challenge Kejriwal’s tenure as CM in the High Court. A preceding instance on March 28 involved a public interest litigation (PIL) by Surjit Singh Yadav, which was dismissed. The Court reasoned that the issue at hand was a matter for the executive and the President to address, stating that judicial interference was not appropriate.
Following this, on April 4, another PIL by Vishnu Gupta, president of Hindu Sena, was also turned away by the Court, which maintained that the decision to remain as CM rested with Kejriwal himself.
However, the Court did subtly hint at a broader ethical consideration, stating,
“At times, personal interest has to be subordinate to national interest but that is his (Kejriwal’s) personal call.”
Sandeep Kumar’s writ petition contended that Kejriwal’s continued tenure as Chief Minister, despite his alleged incapacitation, posed not only constitutional challenges but also infringed upon the Right to Life of Delhi’s residents.
Kumar’s plea demanded a writ of quo warranto, essentially requiring Kejriwal to justify his authority, qualifications, and title to hold the office under Article 239AA of the Constitution. Kumar urged the Court to deliberate on whether Kejriwal should be ousted from his role as Chief Minister, retroactively or otherwise.
CASE TITLE:
Sandeep Kumar v Arvind Kejriwal and Ors.
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
