NEW DELHI: In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL aimed at restricting media coverage and public discourse surrounding the resignation of CM Arvind Kejriwal and the potential imposition of President’s Rule in Delhi.
The bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, rebuked Advocate Shrikant, who filed the PIL, stating that, “Such matters fall outside the purview of the court and could not be stifled.” The court questioned the practicality of imposing emergency measures like censorship or martial law to silence political dissent or control media coverage.
Advocate Shrikant Prasad, the petitioner, alleged bias in media coverage against the Delhi government and accused it of interfering in the democratic process. He sought to restrain BJP Delhi president Virendra Sachdeva from pressuring Kejriwal into resigning through protests, citing disruptions to public peace and traffic flow.
Representing the Union of India, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma argued that the petition lacked merit and was motivated by ulterior motives.
The court observed that as Kejriwal had already approached the Supreme Court regarding his arrest, and the matter was under consideration for interim release, so the issues raised in the petition were moot. While acknowledging Delhi’s progress in education and healthcare under Kejriwal’s governance, the court deemed extreme measures like media censorship unjustified.
Emphasising the significance of freedom of speech, the court underscored its inability to censor the media or silence political adversaries advocating for Kejriwal’s resignation. It highlighted the impracticality of imposing martial law to suppress dissent.
Regarding governance from jail, the court noted the absence of explicit prohibition in the Constitution or any law.
However, it questioned the petitioner’s plea for a gag order against the press, stressing the judiciary’s role in safeguarding press freedom under Article 226.