New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has said that there is no infirmity in the order of the Tihar Jail authorities denying visitation rights to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Rajya Sabha MP Sandeep Kumar Pathak for meeting Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in Tihar Jail.
Statements made by petitioner Pathak were political, for and on behalf of Kejriwal: High Court
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, while disposing of Pathak’s plea challenging denial of permission for physically meeting Kejriwal in Tihar jail, said, “There is not an iota of doubt that the statements made by the petitioner (Pathak) were political, for and on behalf of Shri Arvind Kejriwal and were clearly violative of Rule 587 of DPR (Delhi Prison Rules), 2018.”
Not in favour of allowing Pathak facility of physical ‘mulakat’ with Kejriwal in view of his past conduct, Tihar Jail told High Court
The Tihar Jail authorities submitted before the court that it is not in favour of allowing Pathak the facility of physical “mulakat” with Kejriwal in view of his past conduct of deliberately violating the prison consideration and speaking to media on his deliberations with the Delhi Chief Minister.
Refusal to deny permission for physically meeting Kejriwal in Tihar Jail arbitrary, Pathak told High Court
Pathak told the High Court that the refusal of the Tihar Jail authorities to deny him permission for physically meeting Kejriwal in Tihar jail, where he is currently lodged in judicial custody in Delhi Excise Policy-linked corruption case, was arbitrary, illegal and completely unjustified.
The High Court took note of an e-mail written by Pathak to the jail authorities in which he assured that he will not meet the press persons or give any statement against jail authorities after meeting Kejriwal and further assured the jail authorities that he will go through all the visitation guidelines and rules to ensure a smooth and disciplined visit.
There was violation of Rule 587 of DPR, 2018: High Court
The High Court said that while the distorted meaning may have been sought to be given to the word politics in the court but Pathak himself was aware and conscious that the statements made by him were political in nature which were absolutely prohibited under Rule 587 of DPR, 2018.
“The petitioner being conscious of having violated the Rule 587 of DPR, 2018, himself stated that he may be granted visitations in future and that he shall not commit such violation in future. Though much arguments have been made about there being no violation of Rule 587 of DPR, 2018, but from the tone and tenor of the statements made and also the admissions of the petitioner, clearly indicate that there was violation of Rule 587 of DPR, 2018 and the visitation to the petitioner to physically meet Shri Arvind Kejriwal had been rightly denied,” the High Court said.
On Pathak’s submission that he may be allowed to meet Kejriwal in the future in Tihar Jail, the High Court said that he is at liberty to move an application seeking visitation which shall be considered by the concerned Jail Superintendent in accordance with law.