The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed with Rs 75,000 costs a public interest litigation by a law student seeking “extraordinary interim bail” for Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who is in judicial custody in relation to a money laundering case stemming from the alleged excise scam.

A bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan remarked that the petition was “totally misconceived” and that the court cannot grant “extraordinary interim bail” to a person holding a high office.

This court is of the view that the petitioner’s claim of being custodian of people is devoid of any basis... The petitioner holds no power of attorney on behalf of the R5 to furnish any personal bond. In the present case R5( Kejriwal) has the means and wherewithal to file the case and proceedings which he has so done before this court as well as apex court. Consequently, this court is of the view that no relaxation of concept of locus standi is called for,” the Court stated.

“Does he (the petitioner) attend classes in college? It seems he is not following principles of law,” the bench also comprising Justice Manmeet PS Arora said.

 The court remarked that the AAP leader has the means to take steps to avail his legal remedies and the petitioner holds no power of attorney to make submissions on his behalf.

“Person is taking steps in accordance with law. Who are you? You have some exaggerated notion of yourself. You say you have veto power. That you will give an undertaking (to ensure Kejriwal does not influence witness),” the court stated.

The court emphasised that the concept of equality and Rule of Law were enshrined in the Constitution and Kejriwal was in judicial custody pursuant to judicial orders which were not challenged. “Writ petition is dismissed with costs of Rs 75,000,” the court ordered.

Senior advocate Rahul Mehra, appearing of Kejriwal, said the PIL was “ambush” litigation which was not maintainable and the petitioner has no locus.

The petitioner’s counsel sought “extraordinary interim bail” for the Delhi chief minister on the grounds that his safety was in danger as he was confined with hardcore criminals. The PIL said that to fulfil the responsibilities of the chief minister, Kejriwal’s physical presence was required in his office and home to take quick decisions on all issues and to pass orders in the welfare of the public at large.

The petitioner, a law student, mentioned his name as, “We, the people of India” in the plea claiming that he does not want any name, fame or money from this matter.