Delhi HC Rejects Plea to Ban Kejriwal From Elections Over Court Criticism

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation seeking the deregistration of the Aam Aadmi Party and a ban on senior party leaders, including Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia, from contesting elections over alleged remarks concerning judicial proceedings linked to the excise policy case. The court described the plea as “highly misconceived” and lacking legal merit, while questioning the basis of the petitioner’s demands under existing electoral laws.

The matter came up before a bench led by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, where the court repeatedly sought clarification from the petitioner’s counsel on how criticism of court proceedings could justify the deregistration of a political party or the disqualification of its leaders from electoral contests. The bench observed that no provision under the Representation of the People Act provides for such action merely on the basis of statements made regarding ongoing court matters.

The plea was linked to remarks made by Kejriwal during proceedings connected to the excise policy case being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation. Kejriwal had reportedly boycotted proceedings before Justice Sharma after his application seeking the judge’s recusal was rejected. He had stated that he had lost confidence in the court’s ability to ensure impartial adjudication and referred to Gandhian principles of Satyagraha while explaining his decision to withdraw from the proceedings.

Also Read: Delhi-NCR Brutal Heatwave Makes 9–5 Workdays Feel Much Longer

During the hearing, the High Court stressed that if any statement or conduct is viewed as scandalizing the judiciary, the appropriate legal mechanism would fall under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act. The bench clarified that contempt proceedings, where applicable, do not automatically result in disqualification from elections or the cancellation of a political party’s registration. The judges maintained that electoral penalties cannot be imposed without a clear statutory framework supporting such action.

The petitioner had argued that individuals occupying constitutional or public positions must avoid making statements that could undermine confidence in judicial institutions. Reference was also made to press conferences and public comments allegedly made after court observations in the excise policy matter. However, the court remained unconvinced that these allegations warranted intervention by the Election Commission or justified extraordinary judicial directions against the party and its leaders.

In its final observations, the Delhi High Court declined to entertain the plea and ruled that there was no occasion to issue directions to the Election Commission of India at this stage. The order reinforces the principle that electoral disqualification and party deregistration require specific legal grounds and cannot be invoked solely on allegations of criticism directed at judicial proceedings.

Also Read: Telangana Government Requests Rs 5,000 Crore Central Assistance For Development Projects