The Indian Express (Delhi Edition)
‘No judicial interference’: HC rejects PIL to remove Kejriwal as CM over his arrest
WHILE HEARING a PIL seeking the removal of Arvind Kejriwal as the Chief Minister of the Capital, following his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the now-scrapped excise policy case, the Delhi High Court on Thursday said that there was “no scope of judicial interference on this aspect”. The Delhi CM was arrested on March 21.
On Wednesday, a singlejudge bench of the court, while declining to interfere with the arrest for now, issued a notice to the ED on Kejriwal’s main plea challenging his arrest and remand and his application for interim relief seeking immediate release, listing both on April 3 for “final disposal”.
A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said: “Having heard the counsel for the Petitioner and having perused the paper-book, this Court is of the view that there is no scope for judicial interference in the present matter. This Court in writ jurisdiction cannot remove or dismiss Respondent No. 4 (Kejriwal) from the post of Chief Minister of the Government of NCT of Delhi or declare breakdown of constitutional machinery in the State. It is for the other organs of the State to examine the said aspect in accordance with law.”
The bench dismissed the plea clarifying that it has not commented on the merits of the case. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the continuance of Kejriwal as Chief Minister after his arrest in the money laundering case relating to the liquor policy has degraded the credibility of the Delhi government in the eyes of the general public. He further argued that Kejriwal’s continuance as the Chief Minister would lead not only to obstruction of the due process of law and disrupt the course of justice, but also to breaking down of the constitutional machinery in the state. In support of this contention, he relied on Rule 585 of the Delhi Prison Rules 2018.
During the hearing, the bench asked the petitioner’s counsel to show any prohibition or legal bar which prevents Kejriwal from continuing as the Chief Minister.
“If there is a constitutional failure, the President or Governor will act on it. We will not act on it. We read in today’s newspaper that L-G is examining this issue. It will go to the President for examination. That is up to them, it belongs to a different wing. There may be practical difficulties but the question is if there is any legal bar today... The executive branch can look into this aspect. It may take some time and they may arrive at a conclusion, probably this situation was not envisaged. But how does the court get into all this? Let the executive branch examine it, whatever they have to do they will do,” said the bench orally.
The plea moved by Surjit Singh Yadav called on the Centre, the state of Delhi through the chief secretary and the principal secretary to the L-G to answer under what authority Kejriwal was holding the post of chief minister, and sought his removal from the post.
Yadav’s plea submitted that the chief minister is incapable of transacting any business while in jail. If he is allowed to do so, any material, irrespective of its secretive nature, would have to be scanned thoroughly by the prison authorities before it reaches his hands, the plea said. Such an act, the plea added, would amount to direct breach of the oath of secrecy administered to the Chief Minister under the Third Schedule of the Constitution.
The plea further submitted that Transaction of Business of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules, 1993, empowers a chief minister to call for files from any department of the cabinet.
Kejriwal by virtue of being designated as the Chief Minister “would be well within his rights to demand for the investigation of files, wherein, he has been arraigned as an accused” and such a situation is against the ethos of criminal jurisprudence, the petition added.