The Delhi High Court expressed its frustration on Wednesday regarding the repetitive filing of petitions seeking the removal of AAP convener Arvind Kejriwal from the chief minister’s post following his arrest.
The court rebuked petitioner Sandeep Kumar, a former AAP MLA, for attempting to embroil the court in a “political thicket” and announced it would levy a fine of Rs 50,000 against him. Acting Chief Justice Manmohan, heading the bench, remarked, “This is not a James Bond movie with sequels. The Lieutenant Governor will decide on this matter.”
The bench reiterated its stance that it cannot impose governor’s rule in the capital and emphasized that the petitioner was “making a mockery of the system.” It imposed the fine of Rs 50,000, declaring, “We will pass the order.”
Previously, on March 28, the court dismissed a PIL seeking Kejriwal’s removal, stating there was no legal prohibition against an arrested chief minister holding office. The court also refused to intervene judicially in such matters, asserting it was the responsibility of other state organs to address the issue.
Regarding a second PIL on April 4, the court declined to entertain it, stating Kejriwal’s continuation as chief minister was his personal choice, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the lieutenant governor (LG).
During Wednesday’s proceedings, Kumar’s counsel argued that Kejriwal was now unqualified for office due to his arrest in a money laundering case. Justice Manmohan suggested filing an appeal against previous decisions rather than initiating a third petition on the same matter.
As the petitioner’s lawyer persisted in questioning the government’s adherence to the Constitution, the court urged him to refrain from making political speeches, emphasizing its apolitical stance. Justice Manmohan chastised, “Please don’t give a political speech here. Your client may be a politician, but we are not involved in politics.”
The court criticized the petitioner’s persistence despite previous remarks by a single judge, emphasizing the imposition of costs to deter repeat litigation. Justice Manmohan asserted, “This is enough. Have some courtesy.”
Kumar’s petition was transferred to Acting Chief Justice’s bench from Justice Subramonium Prasad’s court. Earlier, on April 8, Justice Prasad had labeled the petition as seeking “publicity” and recommended imposing “heavy costs.”
In his petition, Kumar argued that Kejriwal’s arrest rendered him incapable of performing the chief minister’s duties under the Constitution, citing the disruption to the constitutional mechanism and the inability to function as chief minister from prison.
Kejriwal was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate on March 21 and is currently in judicial custody.
(With PTI inputs)
