X: @the_news_21
In the wake of Sunita Kejriwal’s public appearance, where she relayed a message from her husband, Arvind Kejriwal, speculation has emerged regarding her potential ascension to the Chief Minister’s position in Delhi while her husband remains under arrest. The parallels drawn to former Bihar CM Lalu Prasad Yadav, who designated his wife, Rabri Devi, as the new chief minister prior to his imprisonment in 1997, have intensified the conjecture.
Sunita Kejriwal’s public reading of her husband’s message to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) workers and the people of Delhi, followed by her visit to him at the Enforcement Directorate (ED) office after the Delhi High Court denied an urgent hearing of his plea against arrest, has fueled discussions about her role in AAP’s leadership during this challenging period.
The speculation gained momentum alongside a video message from Arvind Kejriwal, which was conveyed by his wife earlier in the day. The video, featuring Mrs. Kejriwal seated amidst tricolours and portraits of BR Ambedkar and Bhagat Singh, mirrored the backdrop used by the CM during his conferences. Quoting her husband’s resolve to continue serving the nation despite confinement, Sunita reiterated his determination, stating, “No prison can keep me inside, and I will come out and fulfil my promises.”
In the video message, Arvind Kejriwal reaffirmed his commitment to serving the country despite his arrest, urging AAP workers not to harbor animosity towards BJP members. He stressed the importance of continuing social and public welfare initiatives in his absence, saying, “Don’t hate BJP people due to this. They are our brothers and sisters. I will come back soon,” as conveyed by Sunita Kejriwal.
Meanwhile, on Saturday, the Delhi High Court declined an urgent listing of Arvind Kejriwal’s plea challenging his arrest and custody in the Delhi Excise policy case. Kejriwal had moved the High Court seeking relief from his arrest and the remand order issued by the trial court on March 22.
Arvind Kejriwal was apprehended on March 21 by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with the now-defunct excise policy case. His legal representatives argued that both his arrest and the subsequent remand order were ‘illegal,’ asserting his entitlement to immediate release from custody.
