No error in denying Sandeep Pathak visitation to meet Kejriwal in Tihar: Delhi HC

New Delhi [India], September 4 : The Delhi High Court on Wednesday ruled that there was no error in the decision to deny Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Sandeep Pathak's request to visit Arvind Kejriwal in Tihar Jail.
The court clarified that if Pathak wishes to meet Kejriwal in the future, he may file a new application for visitation, which will be considered by the concerned Jail Superintendent in accordance with the law.
The bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, while dismissing the plea by AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sandeep Kumar Pathak, who had challenged the prison authority's refusal to allow him to meet Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, stated that the claim that the denial of visitation violated the principles of natural justice was unfounded, based on the petitioner's own admissions.
Jail authorities had previously allowed Sandeep Kumar Pathak to meet Kejriwal twice in April. However, they recently denied further meetings, citing that Pathak's subsequent statements to the media violated prison rules and appeared politically motivated.
In response to Pathak's plea, the authorities argued that his actions constituted a deliberate breach of prison conduct, which led them to oppose any further meetings based on his past behaviour.
Responding to the court's query on whether others had been permitted to meet Chief Minister Kejriwal, senior advocate Rahul Mehra, representing Pathak, said three individuals had been allowed to visit Kejriwal, with two currently meeting him.
In his plea, Sandeep Kumar Pathak sought a directive for jail authorities to allow him physical visitation and interviews with Kejriwal. Pathak argued that he had not violated any provision of the Delhi Prisons Rules, which restrict conversations during inmate interviews to private and domestic matters, excluding discussions on prison administration, discipline, other prisoners, or politics.
While Pathak had previously been permitted to meet Kejriwal, authorities later restricted this access, citing his statements made post-meetings, which allegedly breached prison rules. These statements reportedly included comments on Kejriwal continuing as Chief Minister from jail and regularly meeting with ministers.
Pathak's plea challenged the application of Rule 587, contending that its scope is limited to conversations during the interview itself and does not extend to statements made afterwards.
He further argued that the denial of political discussions infringes on democratic principles and constitutional rights, as political speech is fundamental to democracy and should not be restricted unless explicitly prohibited by law or constitutional provisions.