The Delhi High Court expressed its inclination to impose “heavy costs” on the petitioner on Monday, as it moved a plea filed by former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Sandeep Kumar, aiming to oust Arvind Kejriwal from his position as Delhi’s Chief Minister. This came following Kejriwal’s arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case associated with the now-defunct excise policy, with the case transferred to a bench led by acting Chief Justice Manmohan.
Justice Subramonium Prasad’s bench transferred the matter after acknowledging that two similar pleas seeking comparable relief had been heard and dismissed by the said bench. The court is scheduled to resume hearing the case on April 10.
Justice Prasad remarked, “This is just for publicity.” He directed the petition to be listed before the bench chaired by the Acting Chief Justice, citing previous cases handled similarly.
Following the transfer, Justice Prasad commented, “I would have imposed heavy costs.”
In Kumar’s petition, he argued that Kejriwal’s arrest rendered him “incapacitated” to fulfill the duties of the Chief Minister as mandated by the Constitution. The petition contended that Kejriwal’s unavailability complicates the constitutional process, asserting that he cannot discharge his duties from prison in accordance with constitutional mandates.
Quoting Article 239AA(4) of the Constitution, the petition argued that without a free Chief Minister available to render advice, the mechanism outlined for the Council of Ministers aiding the Lieutenant Governor becomes impractical.
The petition sought a writ of quo warranto against Kejriwal, calling upon him to justify his authority to hold office and, subsequently, to remove him from office.
Kejriwal, arrested on March 21, is currently incarcerated in Tihar Jail.
The Delhi High Court had previously dismissed two public interest litigations seeking Kejriwal’s removal from office. A bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora declined to entertain a PIL on April 4, asserting that Kejriwal’s continuation as Chief Minister was his personal choice. Earlier, the same bench rejected a similar PIL, stating that there was no legal impediment preventing the arrested Chief Minister from holding office and that judicial intervention was unwarranted, leaving the matter to other state organs for consideration.
Also Read: ED Grills Arvind Kejriwal’s PA, Summons AAP MLA in Delhi Excise Policy Probe
