Delhi High Court Rejects PIL For Removal Of Arvind Kejriwal From Post Of Chief Minister

The Delhi High Court on Thursday rejected a PIL seeking removal of Arvind Kejriwal, who has been arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the liquor policy case, from the post of Chief Minister of Delhi.

A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said the petitioner failed to show any bar in the law which prohibits the arrested CM from holding office. "Show us, where is the prohibition. Show us any legal bar which you're canvassing," the CJ orally said.

The bench further added there is no scope for judicial interference in the matter and the executive is examining the issue.

"If there is a constitutional failure, President or Governor will act on it...Is there any scope for judicial interference in this? The LG is examining the issue. It will go to the President. It belongs to a different wing. There is no scope for judicial interference in this."

The plea was moved by one Surjit Singh Yadav, a Delhi resident claiming to be a farmer and social worker. He claimed that a Chief Minister accused of a financial scandal should not be permitted to continue in public office.

Kejriwal is presently in ED custody which ends today. He will be produced later today before the city's Rouse Avenue Courts.

Yadav, in the PIL, submitted that Kejriwal's continuation in the post would not only lead to obstruction of due process of law and disrupt the course of justice, but also would lead to a breakdown of the constitutional machinery in the State as Kejriwal does not satisfy most of the limbs of Article 163 and 164 of the Constitution of India owing to his incarceration.

"That the Respondent No.4 has virtually forfeited his office as a Chief Minister of account of being arrested and as he is in the Custody he has disabled himself from performing the duties and responsibilities of being a public servant and as such he ought not to continue as a Chief Minister," the plea said.

Notably, AAP Ministers have been making statements in the media that Kejriwal will not resign from the post and if need be, he will run the government from inside the prison.

Yadav had submitted that a jailed CM would be incapable of transacting any business that the law enjoins upon him and 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 Kejriwal's hands and such an act would amount to direct breach of oath of secrecy administered to the CM under the Third Schedule of the Constitution.

Moreover, the plea had said that the Transaction of Business of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules, 1993 empowers a CM to call for files from any department of the Cabinet and if Kejriwal continues as CM, he would be well within his rights to demand for the investigation of files wherein he has been arraigned as an accused. 

“Such a situation is against the ethos of Criminal Jurisprudence,” the plea read.

Yadav had prayed the Court to issue a writ in the nature of Quo Warranto, calling upon Kejriwal to answer under what authority he is holding the post of CM and consequently remove him.

Notably, Yadav has also filed another PIL seeking to prevent Kejriwal from issuing directions or orders while in ED custody. The plea is yet to be listed.

Title: SURJIT SINGH YADAV v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 373