Delhi High Court rejects PIL asking for Kejriwal to be removed from office as chief minister

The Delhi High Court on Thursday rejected hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought Arvind Kejriwal’s resignation from the position of Delhi Chief Minister after his detention in connection with a money laundering case involving the Delhi excise policy scandal, citing Kejriwal’s personal decision.

Personal interests must sometimes give way to national interests. However, a bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan rejected the second PIL in a week, calling for Kejriwal’s dismissal as Delhi Chief Minister, stating that it was his personal decision.

It is up to Kejriwal if he chooses not to do that (resign). We are a legal tribunal.Do you have any precedents where the court has enforced the governor’s or president’s rule?It questioned the attorney for the petitioner, Vishnu Gupta.

Gupta, who was compelled to withdraw his PIL, had requested that Kejriwal be removed from his position as chief minister of Delhi, effective March 21, the day he was taken into custody. Kejriwal, who is being held in judicial custody at Tihar Jail, has declined to step down as Chief Minister of Delhi.

“If the Chief Minister behaves in a way that violates the law and betrays the confidence placed in him by the constitution,. In such a case, Article 164 of the Indian Constitution prohibits him from being removed from his position as Chief Minister. Because of the accusations of corruption, Respondent No. 4 [Kejriwal] is guilty of violating the constitutional trust, which led to his detention, Gupta said.

The Bench, however, insisted that the President or the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi should make the decision on Kejriwal’s dismissal and that the court was not qualified to make such a determination.

“How can we say that the government of Delhi is not working? The LG is qualified to make such decision. LG doesn’t need our direction. Nobody is here to give him advice. According to the law, he will take any necessary action,” it said.

The high court said that it was “a practical issue not a legal issue” and that it would not discuss it further. Shall we proclaim the government to be inoperable? Lieutenant Governor is quite capable. He doesn’t need our direction. The decision to answer the call is up to you. We shouldn’t assume that they won’t do their duties. We are not ready to tackle this.

It said, “The LG would take constitutional morals into consideration. He and the PM will think about it. They have the position of authority. The courts are not able to handle everything. We don’t run the government. The next time there’s a conflict with a neighboring nation, you’ll claim that everything will work out correctly.

Arvind Kejriwal, the leader of the AAP, was much relieved when the Delhi High Court on March 28 rejected a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) brought by a certain Surjit Singh Yadav, demanding his dismissal as Delhi Chief Minister.

This court believes that there is no room for the judiciary to become involved in the remedy that the PIL is seeking. The PIL is dropped. Yadav’s PIL was dismissed by a Division Bench, which also comprised Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, saying, “We have not commented on the merits.”

“You (Yadav) will need to demonstrate to us some barrier or restriction that prevents him from serving as a CM. The President or the Governor will take appropriate action if there is a constitutional violation. Though I’m confident they’ll determine this, it could take some time. The state of affairs we find ourselves in now is unimaginable. Today, there isn’t a legal bar, according to Justice Manmohan.

“We shouldn’t discuss politics here. This will be taken up by the political parties. They’ll address the general public first. The Bench had said, “It is not for us.”

Referencing constitutional provisions such as Articles 162, 163, and 164, the petitioners said that Kejriwal’s present imprisonment prevented him from carrying out the obligations of his Chief Ministership.