Delhi High Court on Thursday refused to entertain PIL to remove Arvind Kejriwal as chief minister following his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in the excise policy-linked money laundering case.
Delhi High Court on Thursday refused to entertain PIL to remove Arvind Kejriwal as chief minister following his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in the excise policy-linked money laundering case.
Delhi High Court on Thursday refused to entertain PIL to remove Arvind Kejriwal as chief minister following his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in the excise policy-linked money laundering case.
"Let democracy take its own course," Delhi High Court said, dismissing the petition seeking Arvind Kejriwal's removal as chief minister in connection with the liquor policy case.
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday reserved verdict on Arvind Kejriwal's petition challenging his arrest and subsequent remand to the ED in the case till March 28 after hearing both the sides at length.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Wednesday told the Delhi High Court that Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal cannot claim "immunity" from arrest on the ground of upcoming elections as law is applied equally to him and an "aam aadmi".
The AAP national convener, currently in judicial custody, questioned the "timing" of his arrest by the agency and said it was in contravention of the basic structure of the Constitution, including democracy, free and fair elections and level playing field.
His senior counsel claimed the agency was "trying to play" a "fixed match" and the arrest was based on uncorroborated statements of co-accused turned approvers.
The case pertains to the alleged corruption and money laundering in formulating and executing the Delhi government's excise policy for 2021-22 that was later scrapped.
The Delhi High Court last week also rejected a PIL seeking the removal of Arvind Kejriwal from the post of Delhi chief minister following his arrest in the excise policy-linked money laundering case.
A bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan said the petitioner did not show any legal provision prohibiting the AAP leader from running the government post arrest to warrant any judicial interference, and the executive authorities would act in case there is a constitutional failure.
"There may be difficulties. It will be practically very very difficult. We accept all those. (But) Is there any scope for judicial interference in this, on this issue?," the bench, also comprising Justice Manmeet P S Arora, stated.
"This court is of the view that there is no scope for judicial interference vis-a-vis the relief sought for removal of respondent no. 4 (Kejriwal). It is for the other wings of the government to examine in accordance with the law," the court concluded.