Giving interim relief to expelled AAP MLA Vinod Kumar Binny, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday held that he would not have to follow the party whip till the disposal of his plea by the court.
Binny has approached the court seeking protection from disqualification as an MLA in case he chooses to vote on any issue in the Delhi Assembly against the AAP party whip. He has also asked to be declared as an Independent MLA.
During the hearing before the court of Justice Manmohan, Delhi government counsel Zubeda Begum, appearing on behalf of the Speaker had argued that since the Assembly was in “suspended animation” the petition was premature and could not be entertained.
The court held that “the petitioner’s right (for relief) should not be curtailed”.
The Laxmi Nagar MLA in his plea had challenged the letter sent by the Assembly Speaker, which said he was bound to follow party decisions in spite of the expulsion.
He had also brought the attention of the court to the decision of the apex court in the cases of Samajwadi Party leaders Amar Singh and Jaya Prada, who had been granted protection from disqualification as MPs by Supreme Court, after they were expelled by SP. The court is deliberating on whether an expelled member could be disqualified if he chooses to defy a party whip. “This court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to parity with the Amar Singh case,” the judge held.
“Letter dated February 11, 2014 of the Speaker of the Delhi Assembly is stayed till the next date of hearing and the G Vishwanathan judgement (relied upon by the Speaker) will not be applicable to the petitioner,” the court said.
The Speaker has been asked to submit a response on legal provisions pertaining to disqualification and declaration of an MLA as Independent.
HC quashes cheating case against Aam Aadmi Party
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a PIL seeking directions to the
CBI to register a case of cheating and corruption against former chief minister Arvind Kejriwal for “misleading the voters by making false promises” in the election manifesto.
A division bench of acting Chief Justice BD Ahmed and Justice Siddharth Mridul asked the petitioner to lodge a cheating case in a police station instead.
Advocate M L Sharma had approached the Delhi High Court, alleging that the Kejriwal’s Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) had “misled Delhi citizens by making false promises in the election manifesto in their bid to enjoy power and benefits”.
Advocate Sharma said the Home Ministry should have taken suo motu action and ordered FIR against AAP under Section 420 of IPC, for making poll promises which cannot be realised.
During the arguments, as Sharma alleged that all the citizens of Delhi had been cheated the, the court asked him to “get any one of those two crore citizens to file the FIR”.
“We will not hear this case,” the court said.