Delhi HC Dismisses PIL Seeking Interim Bail For Kejriwal

Image Credit : Google

Digital Desk: A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) asking for Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's release on "extraordinary interim bail" in relation to multiple criminal cases, including one under investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), was dismissed by the Delhi High Court on Monday. The contentious Delhi excise policy is at the centre of the cases that are presently being investigated or tried.

The PIL was dismissed by a division bench made up of Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora and Acting Chief Justice Manmohan, who said the case could not be maintained. The judges emphasised that if Kejriwal wants to request bail, he has the ability to go to the court and initiate the necessary procedures while he is under judicial custody. They further stated that a person holding a high office is not eligible to receive extraordinary interim bail from the court under its writ jurisdiction.

A fourth-year law student filed the PIL under the moniker "We the People of India," demanding Kejriwal's release on the grounds that his imprisonment was impairing Delhi's government. Concerning Kejriwal's safety and security, the petitioner brought up recent high-profile incidents that occurred while he was in detention, such as the murders of politician Atiq Ahmed and gangster Tillu Tajpuriya.

The petitioner did not possess a power of attorney to represent Kejriwal, nor was it able to provide a personal bond or guarantee that Kejriwal would not sway witnesses, as the court rejected these arguments. Speaking on behalf of Kejriwal, senior attorney Rahul Mehra referred to the petition as "publicity interest litigation" and chastised the petitioner for trying to represent the Chief Minister without being authorised to do so.

According to the PIL, Kejriwal's removal from office as Chief Minister would have a negative effect on Delhi's administration, affecting three crore citizens. It also brought attention to worries about healthcare and education as a result of Kejriwal's imprisonment. The court rejected these arguments, emphasising that it is not the function of the judiciary to impede the progress of the legal system.

The High Court emphasised that national interests must take precedence over personal interests in light of the dismissal.