New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed with prices a public curiosity litigation by a legislation pupil in search of “extraordinary interim bail” for Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. The counsel for the AAP chief additionally opposed the PIL, asserting that Kejriwal was able to pursuing authorized treatment himself.
A bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan mentioned the courtroom can not grant extraordinary interim bail in legal instances solely as a result of the particular person concerned holds a excessive workplace as everyone seems to be equal earlier than legislation.
“There should be no undertrial in custody according to you. Does the petitioner attend classes in college? Does the petitioner have good attendance? It seems he is not following principles of law,” the bench, additionally comprising Justice Manmeet PS Arora, mentioned in regards to the petitioner, a legislation pupil.
Senior counsel showing for Kejriwal opposed the petition and mentioned it was filed for publicity.
Holding that the PIL was not maintainable, the courtroom remarked that the AAP chief has the means to take steps to hunt authorized treatments and the petitioner holds no energy of lawyer to make statements and undertakings on his behalf.
“Person (Kejriwal) is taking steps in accordance with law. Who are you? You have some exaggerated notion of yourself. You say you have veto power. That you will give an undertaking (to ensure Kejriwal does not influence witnesses),” the courtroom mentioned, severely chastising the petitioner.
The courtroom mentioned the ideas of equality and rule of legislation had been enshrined within the Constitution and Kejriwal was in judicial custody pursuant to courtroom orders.
“You are presuming that if you are a politician, you will never be sent to jail. There is no immunity,” the courtroom mentioned.
“Writ petition is dismissed with costs of Rs 75,000,” the courtroom ordered.
Senior advocate Rahul Mehra, showing for Kejriwal, mentioned it was an “ambush” litigation which was not maintainable and the petitioner has no locus standi.
Highlighting that the petitioner’s father was heading a political social gathering, Mehra added that the petition was politically motivated and filed for publicity.
The petitioner’s counsel sought “extraordinary interim bail” for the Delhi chief minister on a number of grounds, together with that his security was in peril as he was confined with hardcore criminals.
He mentioned since determination making within the Delhi authorities was being hampered on account of non-availability of its “head”, Kejriwal ought to be launched.
The courtroom mentioned it has already given its opinion on Kejriwal persevering with because the chief minister regardless of his arrest and that the matter fell inside the government’s area.
“We have earlier said at times personal interest has to be subordinate to national interest. It is the personal call of the chief minister. We are not here to advise anyone. It is not for us,” the courtroom acknowledged.
It mentioned the petitioner’s declare that he has the “veto power” to provide concession was “odd” and his supply to increase a private bond in favour of the politician to make sure that he doesn’t tamper with proof upon his launch was “even more strange”.
“He does not want any help of yours. Who are you? You are member of the United Nations? You have veto power? If you have decided (to grant interim bail), why have you come (to court)?” the courtroom requested the petitioner and questioned his locus standi to file the PIL.
The PIL mentioned the petitioner has “decided, by using his ‘veto power’, to release on extraordinary interim bail” Kejriwal in all of the legal instances lodged by the ED and CBI in opposition to him until the completion of his tenure and the trial.
The PIL mentioned to fulfil the duties of the chief minister, Kejriwal’s bodily presence was required in his workplace and residential to take fast choices on all points and to cross orders within the welfare of the general public at massive.
The petitioner talked about his identify as “We, the people of India” within the plea, claiming that he doesn’t wish to earn any identify, fame or cash from the matter.
