Why Doesn't Kejriwal Join The Investigation If He Has Proof?
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.
View all posts by this Author
By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2024-02-05 06:28:55
About the Author
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.
View all posts by this Author
Before AAP supremo Arvind Kejriwal can accuse Delhi Police of 'drama', he has to explain to the public why he made wild allegations (in the absence of proof, they will remain so) about the BJP offering Rs 25cr to his MLAs to switch sides. Kejriwal has often raised the bogey of his MLAs being approached by the BJP ever since AAP formed the government in Delhi. But this time he has accused that money was offered and has also put forth a figure. As per the laws of the nation, offering cash or other inducements to people's representatives to switch sides is a cognizable offence. Hence, if someone accuses that MLAs are being paid money to switch allegiance and if the police receive a complaint in this regard, it is their duty to investigate the matter. In the instant case, the Delhi unit of the BJP has filed a complaint. So, Delhi Police was not in drama mode but conducting a serious investigation for bribery to MLAs.
Arvind Kejriwal, and for that matter no political leader, cannot be allowed to get away with making false and wild allegations against any other party. If, indeed, AAP MLAs were offered money, Kejriwal should join the investigation and present proof of that. If concrete proof is not available, he can at least inform the police which of his MLAs were approached and by whom. But that again will be hearsay as obviously Kejriwal was definitely not present when the alleged offer was made to his MLAs. What is to stop the MLAs from spreading false tales to increase their bargaining power in the party? Kejriwal has ignored five summons from the ED in the Delhi liquor excise case. Now he will most likely ignore the Delhi police summons in the MLA bribery case too. Each time he takes the stand that these investigations are politically motivated. But if he has nothing to hide in the first case and has proof in the second, what is stopping him from joining the investigation and clearing the matter?
