New Delhi, September 4, 2024 — The Delhi High Court has directed the Tihar Jail authorities to respond to a plea by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MP Sanjay Singh, who claims he has been denied a physical meeting with Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal while Kejriwal is under judicial custody.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna granted the jail authorities three days to file their response to Singh’s petition and scheduled the matter for further hearing on September 9.
Singh, a Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament, contends that his request to meet Kejriwal was denied on the grounds that he is an “ex-prisoner.” During the hearing, senior advocate Rahul Mehra, representing Singh, argued that the denial is unjustified, particularly given Kejriwal’s serious health concerns. Singh’s family reportedly wishes to meet him to assess his condition.
Mehra criticized the handling of the situation by the jail superintendent, describing it as indicative of a “shocking state of affairs.” He argued that as an undertrial and a sitting MP, Singh had provided an undertaking to comply with prison regulations and should be permitted a meeting with Kejriwal.
The denial of the meeting was justified by citing Rule 588 of the Delhi Prison Rules, which restricts visits by ex-prisoners and habitual offenders unless a genuine reason is demonstrated. Mehra contends that this rule is being misapplied, intended to prevent negative influences but not to unfairly restrict access.
The counsel for the jail authorities requested a week’s time to respond to the petition. However, the court granted a shorter period of three days to submit their position.
Singh is currently facing prosecution in the excise policy scam case, investigated by the Enforcement Directorate. He was granted bail by the Supreme Court on April 2, 2024.
In a related matter, AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sandeep Kumar Pathak had previously approached the high court seeking permission to meet Kejriwal. Pathak was allowed to meet Kejriwal twice in April, but subsequent requests were denied. The jail authorities cited Pathak’s statements after the meetings as violating prison rules and being politically motivated. The court has already reserved its order on Pathak’s plea.
