A bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana disposed off the petition, which had also sought direction to the Centre to provide adequate security to Kejriwal and his Cabinet ministers.

Advocate Anoop Awasthi, the petitioner in the case, told the court during the hearing that the Chief Minister was no more an ‘Aam Aadmi’ (common man) but a ‘Khas Aadmi’ (important man) having the responsibility of the entire state and, therefore, he needs to be protected and should take security to remain safe.

He said the Chief Minister is time and again refusing security, putting his life and that of his Cabinet ministers in grave danger.

At this, the bench asked him, "Who are you? What is your interest? The person for whom you are seeking security is himself not interested. He is the Chief Minister of the State. He is aware of the consequences."

To this, the petitioner replied that, "I am a citizen of the state and interested in the well being of the Chief Minister."

The bench remarked, "He is the man who has to protect all of us. He is the Chief Minister. He is the State. It is the duty of the State to protect citizens; we don't need to protect him."

The court inquired from the Centre and Delhi government, who were made parties in the petition, whether any security was being provided to Kejriwal.

The counsel for the Centre and the Delhi government told the court on the basis of police record, which they refrained from disclosing in open court, that they are giving ‘complete protection’ to Kejriwal.

On being asked by the bench that how the security was being provided if he does not want it, the counsel said they are giving him protection through securitymen in ‘plain clothes and otherwise’.


Latest News from State News Desk