As Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia refuse to appear before the Delhi High Court in the excise policy case, calling their absence a form of ‘satyagraha’, even though clear legal precedent allows the court to continue hearings, examine the record, and deliver a judgment without their presence, does this decision raise deeper questions about whether they are taking a genuine stand against what they claim is bias, or simply avoiding direct scrutiny in court while trying to shift the focus into the political space, even at the risk of weakening their own defence as the case moves ahead without them ?
जैसे अरविंद केजरीवाल और मनीष सिसोदिया दिल्ली हाई कोर्ट में आबकारी नीति मामले की सुनवाई में पेश होने से इनकार कर रहे हैं और इसे ‘सत्याग्रह’ बता रहे हैं, जबकि स्पष्ट कानूनी प्रावधान अदालत को उनकी अनुपस्थिति में भी सुनवाई जारी रखने, रिकॉर्ड की जांच करने और फैसला सुनाने की अनुमति देते हैं, क्या यह फैसला इस बात पर गंभीर सवाल खड़े करता है कि क्या वे वास्तव में कथित पक्षपात के खिलाफ खड़े हैं, या फिर अदालत में सीधे सवालों से बचते हुए इस मुद्दे को राजनीतिक दिशा देने की कोशिश कर रहे हैं, भले ही इससे उनका अपना पक्ष कमजोर क्यों न हो ?
As two FIRs are registered against Sandeep Pathak in Punjab soon after his reported political shift towards the Bharatiya Janata Party, and with indications of possible arrest emerging almost immediately, does the timing of these developments raise larger questions about whether such legal actions are purely driven by evidence and due process, or whether they risk being perceived as closely linked to political realignments, thereby blurring the line between enforcement of law and the optics of political pressure ?
