A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed before the Delhi High Court aiming to stay Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal from issuing directives while under Enforcement Directorate (ED) custody. The petition 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.
NEW DELHI: 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.
READ ALSO: Arvind Kejriwal Arrest| Massive Protests Called by AAP Legal Cell in Delhi Courts
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.
READ ALSO: Delhi High Court to Review Kejriwal’s Plea Against ED Arrest Over Liquor Scam
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.
