New Delhi: Just a few weeks after its superlative show in the Delhi Assembly elections, the Aam Aadmi Party has plunged into a crisis and has been lurching from one problem to another.
After infighting among the top leadership which saw two founding party members - Prashant Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav - being thrown out of the AAP Political Affairs Committee and charges of horse-trading against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, the latest salvo against it has been fired by a Delhi court which has minced no words in criticising the party leadership.
Delhi's Karkarduma court on Tuesday directed Kejriwal, Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and Yogendra Yadav to appear before it later in the day in connection with a criminal defamation complaint. Metropolitan Magistrate Mayuri Singh while saying there was no ground to exempt the trio from appearance and took a strong view saying Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yadav "have no respect for the law".
Earlier, the three AAP leaders had appealed before the court to exempt then from personal appearance for the day while claiming that lawyers are on strike and as the case was at a crucial stage, so the presence of advocates was necessary.
The case was put up before magistrate Singh as Metropolitan Magistrate Muneesh Garg, before whom the matter was going on, was on leave on Tuesday.
The court had earlier directed Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yadav to positively appear before it on March 17 as it was scheduled to pass order in the issue of framing of charges. During the hearing, the court said the exemption application displayed no reason for the absence of the accused.
"There is nothing to reflect why accused (Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yadav) have not appeared. Accused have no respect for law. Considering no one has appeared for accused, I am keeping the matter pending at 2 PM. Call at 2 PM," the magistrate said.
Kejriwal, Sisodia and Yogendra Yadav were released on bail after they had appeared in the court on June 4, 2014 in pursuance to summons against them by the court.
The summons to them were issued on the complaint of advocate Surender Kumar Sharma under sections 499, 500 (defamation) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC, with the court, saying there was prima facie material to summon the accused.
While issuing summons against AAP leaders, the court had said, "The press release published in newspapers as well as testimonies of witnesses reflect that defamatory remarks were published in the newspaper which affected the reputation of the complainant in the society and lowered his reputation in the eyes of other members of the society."
The court, however, had rejected the complainant's plea that AAP leaders had conspired and cheated him, saying in the absence of the very element of deception, there was no prima facie material against any of the accused for the offence of cheating and criminal conspiracy.
Sharma had alleged that in 2013 he was approached by volunteers of AAP who had asked him to contest Delhi Assembly election on a party ticket saying Kejriwal was pleased with his social services.
He filled up the application form to contest the polls after being told by Sisodia and Yadav that AAP's Political Affairs Committee had decided to give him the ticket. However, it was later denied to him.
On October 14, 2013, the complainant claimed that articles in leading newspapers carried "defamatory, unlawful and derogatory words used by the accused persons" which have lowered his reputation in the Bar and the society.
The court, which had earlier reserved its order for February 11, had granted exemption to the three AAP leaders from personal appearance for that day and had given them a last opportunity to positively appear before it on March 17.
Kejriwal had sought exemption from personal appearance for that day on the ground that he had to meet Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh after the Delhi Assembly elections results which were announced on February 10.
Comments
0 comment