A PIL in the Delhi HC seeks to deregister the Aam Aadmi Party and disqualify Kejriwal, Sisodia, and Pathak. The plea alleges they violated the Representation of the People Act by refusing to participate in court proceedings for the excise policy case.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Delhi High Court seeking directions to the Election Commission of India to deregister the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) for alleged violation of Section 29A(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and to disqualify Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak from contesting elections. The PIL has been filed by Satish Kumar Aggarwal against the Union of India, Election Commission of India, AAP, former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and AAP leader Durgesh Pathak.
Allegations in the PIL
According to the petition, the relief has been sought on the ground that the AAP leaders allegedly refused to participate in proceedings before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court in matters arising out of the Delhi excise policy case. The petitioner alleged that such conduct undermines the authority and dignity of the constitutional court and amounts to failure to bear "true faith and allegiance" to the Constitution as required under Section 29A(5) of the Representation of the People Act. The plea stated that the petition was filed in public interest to uphold "public confidence in the justice delivery system" and to ensure equal respect for judicial proceedings irrespective of political office or status.
Referring to media reports, the PIL stated that on April 27, 2026, Kejriwal publicly announced that he would neither appear personally nor through counsel before Justice Sharma in proceedings connected with the excise policy case. The petition further referred to reports that Sisodia and Pathak subsequently conveyed similar decisions to the Court.
Petitioner's Arguments and Demands
The petition contended that while the judicial system provides remedies such as appeals before higher courts, litigants cannot boycott court proceedings merely because they are dissatisfied with judicial orders. It argued that such conduct could create a dangerous precedent and weaken public confidence in judicial institutions. The PIL further stated that participation in judicial proceedings "cannot be treated as discretionary or optional except where exemption is expressly granted by a competent court in accordance with law."
In its prayer clause, the petition sought a writ directing the Election Commission to deregister AAP and also sought directions to declare Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak disqualified from contesting elections to Parliament or State Assemblies. The petitioner has relied upon various media reports annexed with the plea, including reports regarding the statements and letters allegedly issued by Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak concerning the proceedings before Justice Sharma. (ANI)
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)