File photo: Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal with party workers during the dharna near Rail Bhavan in New Delhi
New Delhi:
Arvind Kejriwal faced questions today from the Supreme Court, which said it would examine whether a person holding a constitutional post can play the "double role" of Chief Minister and street agitator. The court also rapped the Delhi Police for allowing Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) activists to violate a ban on large gatherings with its protest in the heart of Delhi on Monday and Tuesday, against the city's police.
"The Constitution is supreme and every institution is a product of Constitution and every individual who holds the office is governed by the Constitution," a bench comprising Justices RM Lodha and Shiva Kirti Singh pointed out.
"We are only concerned with Constitutional issues,'' said the court, as it agreed to examine whether a person holding a constitutional office can be a street agitator at the same time, under the Constitution of India.
The bench asked the Delhi Police to explain how could a dharna by thousands of people, led by Mr Kejriwal, be held in the heart of the city at time when prohibitory orders were in place.
"How did they assemble when prohibitory orders were clamped? Why did you let it happen in the first place when the mob is already there?" the court asked Delhi Police Commissioner BS Bassi.
"What we are inclined to know is whether police acted. Only five people were allowed first. Their numbers swelled to 500 and thereafter into thousands," the court said.
The top court was hearing two Public Interest Litigation or PILs filed by two Supreme Court advocates which sought action against Mr Kejriwal, his cabinet colleagues and supporters of his AAP for defying prohibitory orders and holding a 33-hour dharna in the heart of the capital. The petitioners said this amounted to a breakdown of the constitutional machinery.
"The Constitution is supreme and every institution is a product of Constitution and every individual who holds the office is governed by the Constitution," a bench comprising Justices RM Lodha and Shiva Kirti Singh pointed out.
"We are only concerned with Constitutional issues,'' said the court, as it agreed to examine whether a person holding a constitutional office can be a street agitator at the same time, under the Constitution of India.
The bench asked the Delhi Police to explain how could a dharna by thousands of people, led by Mr Kejriwal, be held in the heart of the city at time when prohibitory orders were in place.
"How did they assemble when prohibitory orders were clamped? Why did you let it happen in the first place when the mob is already there?" the court asked Delhi Police Commissioner BS Bassi.
"What we are inclined to know is whether police acted. Only five people were allowed first. Their numbers swelled to 500 and thereafter into thousands," the court said.
The top court was hearing two Public Interest Litigation or PILs filed by two Supreme Court advocates which sought action against Mr Kejriwal, his cabinet colleagues and supporters of his AAP for defying prohibitory orders and holding a 33-hour dharna in the heart of the capital. The petitioners said this amounted to a breakdown of the constitutional machinery.
Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world
