‘Highly adventurous’: Delhi HC dismisses plea seeking permission to allow arrested politicians to campaign virtually during polls

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora also orally observed that the petition was contrary to the “fundamental principles of law”.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner said that he is not only a student but an elector of Delhi and has the right to learn the policies of the political party. The plea states that electors of Delhi are “deprived of their fundamental right to get information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India from the party leader by way of being spectators/listeners of the election campaign”.

“You want all people who are in jail, should be allowed to campaign in elections virtually? I’m telling you if this is done all the dreaded criminals will register themselves with political parties…,” the bench orally said, adding that it is not for the court to decide this aspect as the court does not decide policy matters.

The petitioner’s counsel said that because the MCC is in force, the government cannot take any decision on this issue. To this the bench said, “So today if a candidate is standing in elections and he has committed a murder so because MCC is in force does it mean he will not be arrested?”

“Please understand this. There are people who are involved in rape, murder, kidnapping (cases) will start floating political parties before elections. It is not for us to make the law, it is for the legislature to do so,” the bench said.

It further orally remarked, “You are saying that someone who is arrested and is in custody by virtue of a judicial order he may be allowed to campaign. It seems some people have an exaggerated notion about us. We are bound by the law equally. We don’t pass any order contrary to law.”

The petitioner’s counsel, however, said that he was not objecting to the power of the authorities to arrest but was only seeking that the candidates who have not been convicted be allowed to campaign in virtual mode with certain restrictions.

To this the bench questioned, “Is it in our domain to say how a campaign is to be conducted? Would that not amount to a change in law?”

It also remarked that an attempt was being made to drag the court in a “political thicket”.

“Today the campaign is taking place outside the court but it seems like it is happening inside. This is all a little bit of propaganda and publicity involved here. Please don’t tell us what is happening. We understand what is happening. The attempt is to involve the court in politics when we want to stay away from it,” the bench orally remarked.

At this stage the bench said that it shall dismiss the PIL and will impose costs of above Rs 75,000 on the petitioner. It said this as it referred to a matter where it had dismissed and imposed a cost of Rs 75,000 on a law student seeking extra ordinary interim bail for Kejriwal.

“This is a highly adventurous plea. The petition is contrary to fundamental principles of law. Have you not followed? When the first petition came for dismissal of the chief minister we said that we will not dismiss him because we do not have the power,” the bench remarked.

At this stage the petitioner’s counsel said he “respects the court’s opinion” and shall “convey the message” to the petitioner urging that costs may not be imposed, as the petitioner is a student. The bench then said that it shall not impose costs on the petitioner provided that the counsel teaches the petitioner about the separation of powers.

The PIL states that such arrested political leaders are also deprived of their “constitutionally guaranteed fundamental and legal right” to campaign.

Among its prayers, the plea seeks a direction to the Centre to inform the ECI immediately when a political leader or a candidate is arrested when the MCC is in force.