A ‘phansi ghar’ (or gallows house) is not essential for the functioning of the Delhi Legislative Assembly, AAP national convenor and former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia, who also held several portfolios in the previous AAP government, told the Delhi High Court on Wednesday. The remarks came in response to the Privilege Committee Summons over the matter. The AAP leaders are expected to appear before the Committee on Thursday.
“What has this phansi ghar got to do with legislative functioning of the House? Nothing…If you (Assembly) had not reserved a plan in the earlier Assembly to continue with this, you can’t now…The (preceding) House (led by AAP) is gone, it can’t be done, there was no pending motion,” senior advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for the AAP leaders, submitted before Justice Sachin Datta of the High Court on Wednesday. The Committee has sought the AAP leaders’ appearance before it for verifying the “authenticity” of the structure.
In 2022, Kejriwal, the then CM of Delhi, had inaugurated a structure on the Assembly premises, which was claimed to be a British Raj-era execution chamber or phansi ghar. However, a political row broke out this year in August related to the structure when BJP MLA and Assembly Speaker Vijender Gupta told the House that the structure was actually a “tiffin room” as per records. Chief Minister Rekha Gupta had accused the AAP government of misleading people as the row escalated. Historians have termed it to be “unlikely” that the two rooms in the Assembly building, which were renovated in 2022, were a phansi ghar.
During the hearing on Wednesday, senior advocate Jayant Mehta, appearing for the Assembly and the Privilege Committee countered the AAP leaders, saying that the petition is “preconceived” and is a “classic case of jumping the gun.” Arguing that the notices issued is not one for breach of privilege and is rather for “assisting the Committee to ascertain the authenticity of the phansi ghar and giving those facts to the Committee,” Mehta emphasised that it is “only a factual inquiry”.
The parties were arguing on the maintainability of the petition, and the court is due to consider the matter next on November 24.
Kejriwal and Sisodia, in their petition, have contended that such procedure is without jurisdiction and that the Committee has not complied with procedural safeguards.
The two have underlined in the petition that the proceedings, initiated more than three years after the inauguration “and only after a regime change strongly indicate that the privilege mechanism is being misused for political vendetta rather than for its constitutional purpose of protecting the functioning of the Legislature.”
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More
