Phansi Ghar row: Will Kejriwal appear before Delhi Assembly Committee? No interim order in his favour, says High Court
Former Delhi Chief Minister has not been appearing before the Assembly panel. He has argued that the Committee does not have jurisdiction in the matter, and that it has failed to comply with procedural safeguards.
4 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Nov 24, 2025 05:47 PM IST
Senior party members such as Arvind Kejriwal, Bhagwant Mann, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, and others have been named as star campaigners for the local body polls in Maharashtra next month. (File Photo)
After Arvind Kejriwal failed to appear before the Privileges Committee of the Delhi Assembly at least twice, Delhi High Court has clarified verbally that “there’s no interim order” of the court in favour of the former Chief Minister, and even the maintainability of his plea before the court is “doubtful”.
Kejriwal, the national convener of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), and Manish Sisodia, the former Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi, have challenged the notices issued as part of an inquiry into the inauguration after restoration of a purported Raj-era execution chamber on the premises of the Assembly in 2022.
Appearing for the Assembly and Privileges Committee, senior advocate Jayant Mehta told Justice Sachin Datta on Monday, “They are seeking adjournment before the [Privileges] Committee citing pending Delhi HC proceedings.”
Mehta submitted that no summons had been served on the two AAP leaders – rather, “In the present set of facts, what they’ve received is only a notice from the Committee regarding the inquiry into the facts.”
“They’re coming to the court at the stage where facts are yet to be ascertained. They’re preempting…,” Mehta said.
Justice Datta remarked orally: “There is no interim order [in favour of the AAP leaders] and maintainability [of the prayer] is doubtful….” The court recorded Mehta’s objection to the AAP leaders’ non-compliance with the Committee’s notice.
It noted, “[Mehta] submits that despite the statement being made in the last date that [the petitioners, Kejriwal and Sisodia] are not pressing for interim relief, petitioner has not adhered to the summons… [Mehta submits that] instead of appearing [before the Committee], they are seeking to defer…appearance on grounds of pending proceedings… It is clarified that no interim order is there…”
The court will now hear the case on December 12.
Story continues below this ad
In 2022, Kejriwal, who was Chief Minister at the time, had inaugurated a structure in the Assembly building, which was claimed to be a phansi ghar. This August, Assembly Speaker Vijender Gupta of the BJP told the House that according to the historical record, the said structure was actually a “tiffin room”. As the controversy escalated, Chief Minister Rekha Gupta had accused the previous AAP government of misleading the people.
Historians have said it was “unlikely” that the structure in the Assembly building was a “phansi ghar” at any time.
In their petition filed before the court, Kejriwal and Sisodia have contended that the Committee does not have jurisdiction in this matter, and that it has failed to comply with procedural safeguards.
The Committee was supposed to meet on November 13 “to deliberate the matter regarding the “Faansi Ghar” inaugurated on August 9, 2022 in Delhi Legislative Assembly premises”, according to the notice issued by the Legislative Assembly Secretariat on September 9.
Story continues below this ad
Kejriwal had been asked to appear in person before the panel. In his response sent on September 19, Kejriwal argued that the communication of the Committee “has been issued after a delay of over 3 years from the date of the incident”, and after the dissolution of the then Assembly. He objected to the notice on legal grounds, and described it as a “vendetta oriented distraction strategy”.
Citing judgments of the Supreme Court, Kejriwal submitted that “after the dissolution of the 7th Legislative Assembly of Delhi, the 8th Legislative Assembly…cannot initiate privilege action for actions of the members in the 7th Legislative Assembly”.
The Seventh Assembly was dissolved in February 2025 after the completion of the election process that ended the AAP’s time in power in Delhi, and brought the BJP to power.
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
