Mar 11, 2025 05:44 AM IST
Delhi HC rejects AAP’s Somnath Bharti’s plea for more time to respond in his election challenge against BJP’s Bansuri Swaraj; next hearing on April 17.
The Delhi high court on Monday rejected Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Somnath Bharti’s plea for granting more time to respond to written submissions in the case where he had challenged Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) parliamentarian Bansuri Swaraj’s election as MP from the New Delhi constituency in 2024.
Bharti told court that he did not receive the written statements filed by Swaraj and therefore had no time to address the issue in prior hearings due to the February elections.
A bench of justice Anish Dayal rejected the request after Swaraj’s counsel Rajeev Sharma along with Siddhesh Kotwal informed the court that they had already sent a copy on Bharti’s email in October 2024. The counsels further submitted that Bharti could not be allowed to file his response, three months after filing the written statement and he had not raised the issue of non-receipt of the statements in the previous hearings.
“Law is very clear. We can give you (additional time to file replication). I am not entertaining that ‘I have not received a copy’. This is not a post office… Judicial time is wasted. Tell us one law which states that because the litigant was busy in elections, that is why limitation law will not apply,” justice Dayal said.
The court, during the hearing also reprimanded Bharti sending proxies in his place during previous hearings. “There is no requirement of proxies in court. Please do not send proxies. The duty of counsel is to be in court, you cannot hide behind proxy counsel. That is your mistake, you take it on yourself,” justice Dayal said to Bharti.
Bharti’s suit before the high court contended that some BJP workers distributed money, sarees and suits to the voters on Swaraj’s behalf to influence them to vote in her favour.
In her written statement, filed in October, Swaraj had urged the court to dismiss Somnath’s suit asserting that he had failed to prove any ground on which her election could be declared as “void” and it did not disclose any triable issue as well as material facts regarding the allegations.
The matter has been kept for next hearing on April 17.
Recommended Topics 
Leave a Reply