Today(on 10th April), Delhi High Court dismisses plea to remove Arvind Kejriwal as CM amid his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in the Delhi excise policy scam money laundering case
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
DELHI: Today(on 10th April),The Delhi High Court decisively rejected a petition seeking the ousting of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, citing his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with the Delhi excise policy scam’s money laundering case.
A Division Bench, led by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, scrutinized the petition with a discerning eye, emphasizing the Court’s aversion to being entangled in what they described as a political quagmire.
The petitioner received a strong rebuke for attempting to embroil the Court in political disputes, with the bench remarking-
“You’re trying to get us mixed up in politics! That’s it… We’re charging you 50,000 rupees. That’s fair. This is the fourth time. We’ve got lots of people with real problems waiting.”
The bench reiterated their position by cautioning against political discussions in the courtroom, stating-
“Don’t turn this into a political platform! Take it elsewhere, not here. Keep politics out of the courtroom,”
thereby reaffirming their dedication to maintaining judicial integrity separate from political affairs.
ALSO READ: Hindu Sena Filed PIL Seeks Removal of Kejriwal as CM: Delhi HC
Sandeep Kumar’s plea centered on the argument that Kejriwal, despite being incapacitated by his arrest, still retained the position of chief minister, raising constitutional and ethical concerns. The plea sought a judicial review under the writ of quo warranto, questioning the validity of Kejriwal’s right to hold office amid the grave allegations against him.
Kumar’s counsel expressed doubts about Kejriwal’s suitability for the role of Chief Minister, asserting-
“He is not capable of serving as Chief Minister. There are responsibilities that the Chief Minister must fulfill.”
This argument sought to question Kejriwal’s capacity to carry out his official duties in light of the accusations against him.
The Court inquired about the rules for imposing President’s Rule and mentioned previous instances where judges intervened to remove a state’s chief minister. This highlights the legal complexity involved. However, the petitioner’s attempts to draw comparisons with past cases didn’t persuade the Court. They cautioned about imposing hefty costs if the plea persisted despite prior warnings.
“I will charge you now because you’re continuing despite my colleague (Justice Subramonium Prasad) warning you! We’ve clearly stated that this isn’t like a James Bond movie with sequels,”
– remarked the bench, hinting at the frivolous nature of repetitive litigations on similar issues.
The repeated attempts to litigate against Kejriwal’s position as CM, as noted by the Court, have led to a mockery of the judicial process, with the bench expressing frustration over the diminishing seriousness of judicial petitions.
“It’s individuals like your clients who are making a mockery of our proceedings. We might need to raise your costs as a consequence.”
-stated the bench.
ALSO READ: Chronology of Delhi Excise Policy Case Involving Arvind Kejriwal
This recent plea marks the third unsuccessful attempt to legally compel the High Court to remove Kejriwal as Chief Minister. Previous petitions, including one by Surjit Singh Yadav and another by Vishnu Gupta, president of Hindu Sena, faced rejection, with the Court consistently highlighting the prerogative of the executive and the President in such matters, and suggesting that personal interest should, at times, yield to national interest.
