Plea By Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia Against Privilege Committee Summons 'Misconceived': Delhi Assembly Tells High Court

The Delhi Legislative Assembly on Wednesday opposed before the Delhi High Court the plea filed by Aam Aadmi Party leaders Arvind Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia challenging the summons issued to them by Delhi Legislative Assembly's Privilege Committee over the “phansi ghar” controversy.

Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta appearing for the Assembly submitted before Justice Sachin Datta that the petition is “highly misconceived”, and that the impugned notice has been issued only for assisting the committee in ascertaining the authenticity of phansi ghar.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat appearing for the AAP leaders relied on a bunch of judgments to submit that the petition is maintainable.

“It's a coercive exercise of power by the Committee. That too by Privilege Committee, which can do only one thing which is to determine if privilege has been violated or not,” he said.

Farasat submitted that the test for issuance of such summons is that there should be necessity for legislative functioning of the Assembly.

“It is incumbent on them to show that the phansi ghar is connected to the essential functioning of Assembly….What is this phansi ghar to do with legislative functioning of the house? Nothing,” he argued.

“The house is gone. It cant be done. There was no pending motion…Phansi ghar is not essential and necessary for functioning of Delhi Legislative Assembly. Your lordships will have to decide that. I am not pressing for any interim today,” Farasat submitted.

On the other hand, Mehta said that it was a classic case of jumping the gun and that the notice is not for breach of privilege but for only assisting the committee in ascertaining the authenticity of phansi ghar.

“Committee gets constituted, which includes members of his own party, and appoints a date for deliberating upon the matter. A notice is issued, which my friend calls summons, to assist the committee by appearing before it,” he said.

”The committee is only examining facts. Inquiry is purely factual. Which is why the notice is given to him. Not directed against any individual. Four recipients of notice. Two have not challenged it. Its only a factual inquiry. Today there is no complaint. The procedure is committee conducting an inquiry, it has called a person for undertaking the inquiry. Inquiry into authenticity of phansi ghar inaugurated in August 2022,” Mehta submitted.

The matter will continue to be heard on November 24.

Kejriwal and Sisodia have been summoned to appear before the Privilege Committee tomorrow (November 13.)

As per the petition, more than three years after the inauguration of the Phansi Ghar and several months after the dissolution of the 7th Assembly, the issue relating to authenticity of the structure was raised for the first time in the 8th Legislative Assembly of Delhi on August 05.

The petition submits that the 'Faansi Ghar' was installed as a symbolic memorial relating to the freedom struggle and the sacrifices made by freedom fighters, and that the inauguration were matters of public knowledge.

It further contends that the legislature may have powers to set up committees to inquire into matters to inform legislation or for public oversight, but the brick and mortar design and restoration in premises of the Delhi Legislative Assembly is neither to inform legislation nor for public oversight.

The petition adds that the Privileges Committee does not have the jurisdiction to examine authenticity of the historical facts which had been taken into account the previous incumbent Speaker and Deputy Speaker and to proceed against dignitary who attended the inauguration.

“Even though the Petitioners had replied to the notice dated 09.09.2025, the same has not been duly considered and the notice for sitting summons dated 04.11.2025 makes no reference to the objections or grounds raised by the petitioners in their respective replies,” the plea states.

The AAP leaders have argued that the proceedings suffer from lack of jurisdiction, procedural illegalities, constitutional infirmities, and colourable exercise of legislative power.

“They violate the fundamental rights of the Petitioners under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution and are liable to be quashed,” it states.

Title: ARVIND KEJRIWAL & ANR v. LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, NCT OF DELHI & ORS