New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday rejected the petition seeking removal of Arvind Kejriwal from the post of Delhi Chief Minister after his arrest in a money laundering case, saying that the petitioner has no legal right to demand his removal.
A bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Dutta said that in such circumstances it is a matter of propriety to resign but there is no legal right to remove Kejriwal from the post of Chief Minister after his arrest.
"What is the legal authority? You may certainly have something to say on the propriety but there is no legal authority. It is up to the LG (Lieutenant Governor) to decide what action he wants to take. We will consider this (petition) Not willing to do.", " the bench told counsel for petitioner Kant Bhati.
Dismissing the appeal challenging the Delhi High Court's April 10 order, the bench said, "When the case (Kejriwal's plea against the arrest) was being heard, we had asked him the same question. After all, it It's a matter of propriety." And there is no legal right.”
It was reported that several petitions on this issue have been rejected by the High Court.On April 10, the High Court had expressed displeasure over repeated filing of petitions demanding the removal of Kejriwal.
The court said that once it had dealt with the issue and opined that it fell within the executive domain, there should be no "repeated litigation" as it was not a "James Bond film that would have sequels".
It had rapped petitioner Sandeep Kumar, a former AAP MLA who had sought Kejriwal's removal from office, for trying to involve the court in a "political matter" and said it imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on him. Will go.
On March 28, the court had dismissed another PIL seeking Kejriwal's removal, saying the petitioner had failed to show any legal impediment that would prevent the arrested chief minister from assuming office, citing judicial intervention in such cases. There is no scope for that either. For other organs of the state to consider this issue.Another similar PIL was dismissed by the high court on April 4, saying it was Kejriwal's personal choice to remain chief minister and the petitioner was given liberty to approach the Lieutenant Governor (LG).
Last week, the top court had granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the case related to the alleged excise policy "scam" so that he can campaign in the Lok Sabha elections, but barred him from going to his office or the Delhi Secretariat and signing official documents. . Files, unless absolutely necessary to obtain the approval of the Lieutenant Governor.
Kejriwal was arrested by the ED on March 21, hours after the high court refused to grant him protection from punitive action by the federal anti-money laundering agency.
A bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Dutta said that in such circumstances it is a matter of propriety to resign but there is no legal right to remove Kejriwal from the post of Chief Minister after his arrest.
"What is the legal authority? You may certainly have something to say on the propriety but there is no legal authority. It is up to the LG (Lieutenant Governor) to decide what action he wants to take. We will consider this (petition) Not willing to do.", " the bench told counsel for petitioner Kant Bhati.
Dismissing the appeal challenging the Delhi High Court's April 10 order, the bench said, "When the case (Kejriwal's plea against the arrest) was being heard, we had asked him the same question. After all, it It's a matter of propriety." And there is no legal right.”
It was reported that several petitions on this issue have been rejected by the High Court.On April 10, the High Court had expressed displeasure over repeated filing of petitions demanding the removal of Kejriwal.
The court said that once it had dealt with the issue and opined that it fell within the executive domain, there should be no "repeated litigation" as it was not a "James Bond film that would have sequels".
It had rapped petitioner Sandeep Kumar, a former AAP MLA who had sought Kejriwal's removal from office, for trying to involve the court in a "political matter" and said it imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on him. Will go.
On March 28, the court had dismissed another PIL seeking Kejriwal's removal, saying the petitioner had failed to show any legal impediment that would prevent the arrested chief minister from assuming office, citing judicial intervention in such cases. There is no scope for that either. For other organs of the state to consider this issue.Another similar PIL was dismissed by the high court on April 4, saying it was Kejriwal's personal choice to remain chief minister and the petitioner was given liberty to approach the Lieutenant Governor (LG).
Last week, the top court had granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the case related to the alleged excise policy "scam" so that he can campaign in the Lok Sabha elections, but barred him from going to his office or the Delhi Secretariat and signing official documents. . Files, unless absolutely necessary to obtain the approval of the Lieutenant Governor.
Kejriwal was arrested by the ED on March 21, hours after the high court refused to grant him protection from punitive action by the federal anti-money laundering agency.
