HC scraps plea to dismiss CM, with ‘national interest’ caveat

The Delhi high court on Thursday observed that sometimes “personal interests” must be trumped by “national interest” but left it to Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal to decide if he should stay in office after his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the excise policy case, stressing that it would not intervene in the matter.

A bench, led by acting chief justice Manmohan, remarked that it is not the job of courts to remove a chief minister, and that it would not “enter into this thicket” since the issue was already being examined by the Delhi lieutenant governor (LG).

“At times personal interest has to be subordinate to the national interest but that is his (Kejriwal’s) personal call. If he doesn’t want to do that, that’s up to him. Your remedy does not lie in this court... Courts don’t remove anyone. We don’t remove a chief minister. That is to be done by the legislature,” the bench, also comprising justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, said while allowing Vishnu Gupta, the president of Hindu Sena, to withdraw his petition.

Gupta’s petition argued that Kejriwal’s arrest by the ED constituted a breach of constitutional trust and therefore warranted his dismissal from office. During the hearing on Thursday, Gupta’s counsel Barun Kumar Sinha urged the court to direct the Centre and the Delhi government take action in the interest of the proper functioning of the Capital, saying that a constitutional deadlock had arisen in Delhi after the CM’s arrest. The petitioner also said and the LG seemed to be letting the situation persist for some reason.

However, the court declined to intervene, stating that it should not anticipate the actions of the LG or the President of India, who have discretion in such matters.

“There is a discretion vested in the [lieutenant] governor and the President. They will take a call. Please let us not anticipate that they will not discharge this function. Whatever they have to do, they will do in accordance with law. Let democracy take its way. We have no doubts about it. This matter will be taken to the right conclusion. Everything cannot be done by the court. We don’t administer the state,” the bench told Sinha.

The court also referred to its previous rejection of a similar plea by social activist Surjit Singh Yadav, highlighting the importance of consistency in judicial decisions. “There has to be some certainty... Certainty and predictability in litigation is very important. Right or wrong… we’ve taken a view, ‘no’. Let there be a conclusion. This is not like a James Bond film (with sequels to follow),” remarked the bench.

With the writing on the wall, Sinha opted to withdraw the petition to enable his client to move a representation before the LG, and was allowed by the court to do so.

Kejriwal’s arrest on March 21 by the ED has sparked a massive political controversy, with the AAP leader insisting that he would continue as CM despite being in custody. He also issued two orders from the ED custody, sparking a strong response from the Bharatiya Janata Party.

ED has accused the CM of being the “kingpin” and “key conspirator” of the alleged corruption in the 2021-22 Delhi excise policy, and has said that he acted in cahoots with ministers of his cabinet and other Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders while seeking benefit from in the form of a “company”.

Kejriwal was on Monday sent to Tihar jail following his 10-day custodial interrogation, during which, the agency claimed, the probe focussed on the role of Vijay Nair, a key figure in the case who allegedly played a significant role in facilitating allegedly illicit activities and connections within the liquor industry.

According to the prison’s rules, Kejriwal was required to submit a list of up to 10 people he will meet while behind bars, apart from his lawyers. He is allowed two meetings a week and can only see a maximum of three of these people at a time for up to half an hour. Kejriwal is allowed to meet his lawyer every day

On Wednesday, the Delhi high court reserved judgment on Kejriwal’s petition challenging the validity of his arrest, amid his claims that it was a politically motivated move aimed at undermining him and dent his party’s prospects ahead of the Lok Sabha elections.

Kejriwal was remanded to judicial custody till April 15 on Monday and lodged in Tihar jail after a local court noted ED’s contention that Kejriwal’s release could hamper the investigation as it moved an application to place Kejriwal under 15 days of judicial custody but added that it may seek additional custodial interrogation later.

Senior AAP leader Sanjay Singh was released from Tihar prison after six months on Wednesday, a day after he was granted bail by the Supreme Court. ED did not oppose his bail plea on Tuesday, after the court asked the agency why Singh should be kept behind bars after serving six months in jail, considering that there doesn’t appear to be any concrete evidence against him, and no money has been recovered linking him to the alleged money laundering offence.

Sisodia was also arrested in the case in February last year.