Defamation case: AAP to challenge Magistrate’s order in higher court

AAP said that Kejriwal on Saturday spent his third day in the Tihar Jail because of the principled stand taken by him.

By: Press Trust of India | New Delhi | Published:May 24, 2014 7:44 pm

The Aam Aadmi Party has decided to challenge the order of the Metropolitan Magistrate, who sent its leader Arvind Kejriwal to judicial custody for not furnishing a bond in a defamation case, in a higher court.

“The AAP has decided to challenge the erroneous order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, who sent Kejriwal to judicial custody in the Tihar Jail despite the fact that he was ready to give an undertaking to ensure his presence on all dates of hearing in the case of criminal defamation filed by the former BJP President Nitin Gadkari against him,” the party said in a statement.

AAP said that Kejriwal on Saturday spent his third day in the Tihar Jail because of the principled stand taken by him on the issue of political battles being fought in courts of law. He will be in judicial custody until June 6.

Party volunteers have been asked to distribute Kejriwal’s letter written by him from the Tihar jail to households in Delhi.

“Kejriwal’s fight is not merely confined to a legal uestion of whether an individual summoned in a case of criminal defamation should be subjected to furnishing a bail bond, but it is for the rights of thousands of poor and helpless people languishing in jails due to their inability to furnish such bonds.

“The issue raised by Kejriwal poses a serious question mark on the country’s legal system that whether people who cannot furnish surety bonds will be allowed to suffer in jails merely on technical grounds, even if they have committed no crime,” the party said.

It added that such “mechanical procedures” harass the poor and helpless, these procedures also consume a lot of time of the courts in unnecessary formalities.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. K
    Kay Cee
    May 24, 2014 at 7:15 pm
    AK's stand can lead to betterment of Indian Judicial system by recognising that those unable to furnish the mandatory bail bond get hared for no fault of theirs, and in the event they are eventually found to be innocent in their cases, they ought not to have been sent to jail in the first place. Perhaps a better way of ensuring their court presence would get looked into. Say, an option of agreeing to stay house arrested with members of family furnishing personal undertakings along with that of the arrestee's. Or, some sort of supervised freedom during the period acceptable to both the arrestee and the courts.
    Reply
  2. A
    agd
    May 25, 2014 at 2:25 pm
    How does ten thousnd rs bail ensure anything?Does that guarantee a person will come to court if he realy is acrimnal.?
    Reply
  3. S
    Sane
    May 24, 2014 at 7:56 pm
    This is not a principled stand. There is no principle involved here. Except, of course, Kejriwal saying that laws don't apply to him because he is "special". Get over it Kejriwal. You are nothing more than an arrogant fool. If you want to make laws, then stay in the government and vote for laws. Noone elected you to be the dictator. Your opinion is not a law.
    Reply
  4. R
    Ramesh
    May 24, 2014 at 4:44 pm
    How the furnishing bond is harring poor people. Before determining amount court evaluates capacity of accused and fixes the bail amount. This man is spending more than 80000 on monthly rent so how he feels aggrieved by Rs 10000 bail amount. Do not worry about poors. There are so many people who can take care of them. Poors do not need you and do capitalise on miseries of poor people,
    Reply
  5. R
    Ramesh
    May 24, 2014 at 4:40 pm
    Is he tired of Tihar Jail. He could have approached high court immediately and prevented all this drama. He thought people of Delhi shall come on street and disturb oath taking ceremony which will yield him rich dividends. Nothing of that sort happened. People realised his dramas and ignored him. Now he is looking for escape route to save his face. He could have approached high court after 6th June and spent some invaluable time in Tihar.
    Reply
  6. R
    RAMESH
    May 24, 2014 at 6:44 pm
    drama queen
    Reply
  7. A
    anand
    May 24, 2014 at 10:36 pm
    Good debate. Let this important question should be answered in the overall interest of poor people of India.
    Reply
  8. Load More Comments